Why the study?
What is the optimal periprocedural anticoagulation management strategy using novel oral anticoagulants compared to uninterrupted warfarin in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation?
What is the optimal periprocedural anticoagulation management strategy using novel oral anticoagulants compared to uninterrupted warfarin in patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation?
This review highlights the transition from uninterrupted warfarin to novel oral anticoagulants for periprocedural thromboembolic prophylaxis during atrial fibrillation ablation, noting that optimal NOAC strategies are still being determined.
May warrant caution with periprocedural NOACs for AF ablation; leaves open optimal strategies for prospective trials.
Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia and ablation is becoming more prevalent as a treatment option. Appropriate treatment of atrial fibrillation mandates thromboembolic prophylaxis, and atrial fibrillation ablation periprocedural management of oral anticoagulation is paramount because of the unique susceptibility for thromboembolism that exists for a patient undergoing ablation. Uninterrupted warfarin therapy is the current standard approach for periprocedural atrial fibrillation anticoagulation. Novel oral anticoagulants, including direct thrombin and factor Xa inhibitors, are being used more frequently for thromboembolic prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation patients, but the best strategy for using novel oral anticoagulants in periprocedural anticoagulation is unknown. Optimal periprocedural anticoagulation management strategies with oral anticoagulants, limitations of using novel oral anticoagulants, and future directions in this field are discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garton et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: