Key result
During catheter ablation under uninterrupted oral anticoagulants, dabigatran achieved target ACT faster than rivaroxaban (8.7 vs 11.7 minutes, P<0.001) and apixaban (13.3 minutes, P<0.001).
Why the study?
Activated clotting time kinetics under uninterrupted oral anticoagulants had not been fully evaluated during ablation procedures in daily clinical practice.
Does uninterrupted dabigatran compared to other oral anticoagulants improve ACT kinetics during catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Cohort (n=554)
Does uninterrupted dabigatran compared to other oral anticoagulants improve ACT kinetics during catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Uninterrupted dabigatran provides faster achievement of target ACT and higher ACT stability during atrial fibrillation ablation compared to other oral anticoagulants.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ACT stability varies by OAC during AF ablation; leaves open whether differences warrant agent-specific monitoring.
Activated clotting time (ACT) kinetics under uninterrupted oral anticoagulants (OACs) has not been fully evaluated. The present study is sought to validate ACT kinetics including stability under uninterrupted use of OACs during an ablation procedure in daily clinical practice. We prospectively enrolled consecutive 554 patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent catheter ablation procedure under uninterrupted OACs. We evaluated ACT kinetics at an interval of 15 minutes during the procedure and periprocedural complications among 5 OACs (dabigatran [N = 46], rivaroxaban [N = 125], apixaban [N = 129], edoxaban [N = 184], and warfarin [N = 70]). Compared with the dabigatran group, time to achieve target ACT was significantly longer in the rivaroxaban and apixaban groups, but not in the edoxaban and warfarin groups (8.7 vs 11.7 minutes, P < .001; 13.3 minutes, P < .001; 8.8 minutes, P = .64; 10.3 minutes, P = .19, respectively). Heparin dose to achieve target ACT was comparable except for the warfarin group, whereas, compared with the dabigatran group, time in therapeutic range of ACT within the first hour was comparable in the rivaroxaban and apixaban group but significantly lower in the edoxaban and warfarin groups (73.7 % vs 63.0%, P = .06; 67.0 %, P = .16; 59.2 %, P = .001; 58.2%, P = .004, respectively). In multiple regression analysis, low body weight, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and morning session had significant associations with time and heparin dose to achieve target ACT, and there were positive associations of dabigatran and apixaban with time in therapeutic range of ACT within the first hour. The incidence of periprocedural complications did not significantly differ among the 5 groups. Under uninterrupted OAC use in daily clinical practice, dabigatran showed faster achievement of target ACT and higher stability of ACT than other OACs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kawaji et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=554). Rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and warfarin vs. Dabigatran was evaluated on Time to achieve target activated clotting time (ACT) (p=<0.001). During catheter ablation under uninterrupted oral anticoagulants, dabigatran achieved target ACT faster than rivaroxaban (8.7 vs 11.7 minutes, P<0.001) and apixaban (13.3 minutes, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: