Why the study?
The efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants required evaluation in real-world elderly patients with comorbid stable coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation.
Does oral anticoagulant therapy reduce major adverse cardiac events and provide a net clinical benefit in elderly patients with stable coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation?
Does oral anticoagulant therapy reduce major adverse cardiac events and provide a net clinical benefit in elderly patients with stable coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation?
In elderly patients with stable coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation provides a net clinical benefit by significantly reducing ischemic events, despite an increased risk of major bleeding.
OAC use was associated with lower MACEs in elderly SCAD+AF patients; leaves open confirmation of net benefit in randomized trials.
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants (OACs) in real-world elderly patients with comorbidities of stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: Elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years old) diagnosed with SCAD and AF were consecutively recruited and grouped into patients with or without OAC treatment. Follow-up was performed for 5 years. Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, and systemic embolism. Major bleeding outcomes were defined as events that were type ≥ 3 based on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. The net clinical outcomes were defined as the combination of MACEs and bleeding of BARC type ≥ 3. Results: A cohort of 832 eligible patients (78 ± 6.70 years) was included. Compared to the patients without OAC treatment (n=531, 63.82%), the patients treated with OAC (n=301, 36.18%) were much younger, had higher BMI, and had lower prevalence of heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), renal insufficiency, and previous myocardial infarction. During the follow-up of 5 years, compared to the patients without OAC treatment, patients with OAC had a significantly lower risk of MACEs (20.60% vs. 58.95%, adjusted HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.15-0.30, p<0.001) but a higher risk of BARC ≥ 3 bleeding events (4.65% vs. 1.32%, adjusted HR: 4.71, 95% CI: 1.75-12.64, p = 0.002). In combination, a lower risk of net clinical outcomes could be observed in the patients with OACs (23.26% vs. 58.96%, adjusted HR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.19-0.38, p<0.001). Among the patients with OAC treatment, no significant difference was found for MACEs or BARC ≥ 3 bleeding events between the patients with or without comedications of oral antiplatelet agents. Conclusions: A net clinical benefit of efficacy and safety could be observed in OAC-treated elderly patients with SCAD and AF. This benefit is independent of the comedications of oral antiplatelet treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: