Why the study?
Clinical risk factor-based scores have modest ability to predict bleeding in patients with AF receiving oral anticoagulation, necessitating consideration of specific demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables.
This review provides practical considerations for assessing and managing bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation, particularly in high-risk subgroups.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May guide individualized bleeding risk assessment for OAC in high-risk AF subgroups; leaves open optimal strategies pending dedicated trials.
Major bleeding (especially intracranial hemorrhage) is the most feared adverse event observed in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving oral anticoagulation. Clinical risk factor-based scores have modest ability to predict major or clinically relevant bleeds, and blood biomarkers are increasingly implemented to improve bleeding prognostication in patients with AF on life‑long anticoagulation. To improve the safety of anticoagulation in the era of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs, or direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs], including dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban), specific demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables should be considered. The current review summarizes practical challenges in the management of oral anticoagulation with emphasis on the risk assessment tools, elderly or underweight patients, cancer patients, impact of chronic kidney disease, liver cirrhosis, and thrombocytopenia in the context of bleeding risk in patients with AF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Undas et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: