Why the study?
Clinicians often consider intracranial haemorrhage an absolute contraindication to oral anticoagulation in AF, and pivotal DOAC trials excluded these patients.
Do direct oral anticoagulants provide a net clinical benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous intracranial haemorrhage?
Do direct oral anticoagulants provide a net clinical benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation and previous intracranial haemorrhage?
In patients with atrial fibrillation and previous intracranial haemorrhage, DOACs may offer a net clinical benefit, though individualized multidisciplinary evaluation is required.
Intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) is the most feared haemorrhagic complication of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT), although the risk is significantly lower with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin. Intracranial haemorrhage is generally considered, by clinicians, to be an absolute contraindication to starting or resuming OAT in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). On the other hand, the pivotal trials with DOACs excluded patients with previous ICH. Observational studies actually indicate a net clinical benefit in favour of DOAC in patients with AF and previous ICH. This benefit is confirmed by randomized clinical trials which, however, have the limitation of the small number of cases, but larger clinical trials comparing DOACs vs. aspirin or no therapy are underway. While OAT is certainly contraindicated in patients with lobar ICH and cerebral amyloid angiopathy, in other cases, the decision must be made in the individual patient through an accurate balance between thromboembolic risk and haemorrhagic risk and a multidisciplinary cardio-neurological evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coutsoumbas et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: