Why the study?
Most AF patients have high thromboembolic risk and OACs are advised, but the frequency of and reasons for non-use needed evaluation.
What is the frequency of oral anticoagulant use and what factors predict non-use in patients with atrial fibrillation and high stroke risk?
What is the frequency of oral anticoagulant use and what factors predict non-use in patients with atrial fibrillation and high stroke risk?
In a Polish registry of high-risk AF patients, 91.5% received OACs, with non-prescription primarily driven by conditions that significantly increase bleeding risk.
Background: Most atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are at high risk of thromboembolic, and the use of oral anticoagulants (OACs) is advised in such cases. The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency at which OACs were used in patients with AF and high risk thromboembolic complications, and identify factors that result in OACs not being used in the researched group of patients. Methods: The prospective, multicenter and non-interventional POL-AF registry is a study that includes AF patients from ten Polish cardiology centers. They were consecutively hospitalized between January and December of 2019. All the patients in the study were of high stroke risk. Results: A total of 3614 patients with AF and high stroke risk were included. Among the total study population, 91.5% received OAC therapy; antiplatelet therapy was prescribed for 3.7% of patients, heparin for 2.7%, and 2.1% of patients did not receive any stroke prevention therapy. Independent predictors of no OAC prescription were intracranial bleeding (OR 0.15, 95%CI 0.07–0.35, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR 0.25, 95%CI 0.17–0.37, p < 0.001), cancer (OR 0.37, 95%CI 0.25–0.55, p < 0.001), hospitalization due to acute coronary syndrome (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.33–0.69, p < 0.001), and anemia (OR 0.62, 95%CI 0.48–0.81, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Most AF patients with a high thromboembolic risk received OACs. The factors predisposing a lack of OAC use in these patients were conditions that significantly increased the risk of bleeding complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Szpotowicz et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: