AimsWe sought to describe the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Europe after the release of the 2010 AF Guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology.Methods and resultsThe PREFER in AF registry enrolled consecutive patients with AF from January 2012 to January 2013 in 461 centres in seven European countries. Seven thousand two hundred and forty-three evaluable patients were enrolled, aged 71.5 ± 11 years, 60.1% male, CHA2DS2VASc score 3.4 ± 1.8 (mean ± standard deviation). Thirty per cent patients had paroxysmal, 24.0% had persistent, 7.2% had long-standing persistent, and 38.8% had permanent AF. Oral anticoagulation was used in the majority of patients: 4799 patients (66.3%) received a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) as mono-therapy, 720 patients a combination of VKA and antiplatelet agents (9.9%), 442 patients (6.1%) a new oral anticoagulant drugs (NOAC). Antiplatelet agents alone were given to 808 patients (11.2%), no antithrombotic therapy to 474 patients (6.5%). Of 7034 evaluable patients, 5530 (78.6%) patients were adequately rate controlled (mean heart rate 60–100 bpm). Half of the patients (50.7%) received rhythm control therapy by electrical cardioversion (18.1%), pharmacological cardioversion (19.5%), antiarrhythmic drugs (amiodarone 24.1%, flecainide or propafenone 13.5%, sotalol 5.5%, dronedarone 4.0%), and catheter ablation (5.0%).ConclusionThe management of AF patients in 2012 has adapted to recent evidence and guideline recommendations. Oral anticoagulant therapy with VKA (majority) or NOACs is given to over 80% of eligible patients, including those at risk for bleeding. Rate is often adequately controlled, and rhythm control therapy is widely used.
Due to improved implementation of guidelines, new scoring approaches to improve risk categorisation, and introduction of novel oral anticoagulants, medical management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is continuously improving. The PREFER in AF registry enrolled 7,243 consecutive patients with ECG-confirmed AF in seven European countries in 2012-2013 (mean age: 71.5 ± 10.7 years; 60.1% males; mean CHA2DS2-VASc score: 3.4). While patient characteristics were generally homogeneous across countries, anticoagulation management showed important differences: the proportion of patients taking vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) varied between 86.0% (in France) and 71.4% (in Italy). Warfarin was used predominantly in the UK and Italy (74.9% and 62.0%, respectively), phenprocoumon in Germany (74.1%), acenocoumarol in Spain (67.3%), and fluindione in France (61.8 %). The major sites for international normalised ratio (INR) measurements were biology laboratories in France, anticoagulation clinics in Italy, Spain, and the UK, and physicians' offices or self-measurement in Germany. Temporary VKA discontinuation and bridging with other anticoagulants was frequent (at least once in the previous 12 months for 22.9% of the patients, on average; ranging from 29.7% in Germany to 14.9% in the UK). Time in therapeutic range (TTR), defined as at least two of the last three available INR values between 2.0-3.0 prior to enrolment, ranged from 70.3% in Spain to 81.4% in Germany. TTR was constantly overestimated by physicians. While the type and half-lives of VKA as well as the mode of INR surveillance differed, overall quality of anticoagulation management by TTR was relatively homogenous in AF patients across countries.
The combined use of OAC and AP therapy is not uncommon in AF, largely inappropriate, explained by the coexistence of coronary or peripheral arterial disease, and not influenced by considerations on the risk of bleeding.
In patients with Grade 2-3 hypertension, long-term treatment with OLM/AML/HCTZ triple combination therapy was well tolerated and effective. A high level of BP control and a substantial reduction in the level of hypertension severity were achieved.
3This prespecified subgroup analysis of a phase III study examined the effect of adding hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) to olmesartan (OLM)/amlodipine (AML) in patients with moderate to severe hypertension stratified by age, sex, body mass index, and hypertension severity. A total of 2690 patients, aged 18 years and older, with seated blood pressure (SeBP) ≥160/100 mm Hg received placebo or OLM/AML 20/5 mg, 40/5 mg, or 40/10 mg during a 2-week, double-blind, run-in period, after which they were allocated to one of eight treatment groups with the same OLM/AML dose or with HCTZ 12.5 mg or 25 mg added for 8 weeks. By week 10, greater reductions in SeBP were observed in each OLM/AML/HCTZ group (P<.05, respectively) compared with the corresponding dual dose. Adding HCTZ increased blood pressure-lowering efficacy in all subgroups, with a higher proportion of blood pressure goal achievement vs dual therapy. OLM/AML/HCTZ reduced SeBP to a greater extent than OLM/AML in patients with moderate to severe hypertensive; this was unaffected by baseline hypertension severity, age, sex, and obesity. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2014;16:729-740. ª
NOACs), 5.2% on antiplatelets (AP) and 11.0% on VKA+AP combinations. In the "convenience" dimension, the overall score (0-100 range) was 82.9 ±17.3. The score was higher in the NOAC group (88.1 ± 13.0) compared to the VKA (82.1 ± 17.5), AP (87.0 ± 17.9) or VKA +AP groups (83.2 ± 16.8), respectively. In the "anticoagulant treatment satisfaction" dimension of the PACT-Q2, the overall score was 63.4 ±15.9. Again, this score was higher in the NOAC group (66.6 ±16.6) compared to the VKA (63.2 ±15.9), AP (63.7 ±16.8), or VKA + AP groups (62.8 ±15.0), respectively. ConClusions: Overall, patients on current anticoagulation achieve relatively high values on the convenience scale, but moderate values on the satisfaction scale. While differences in group size and patient characteristics need to be taken into account, patients on NOACs compared to patients on VKAs tend to rate their convenience and treatment satisfaction higher.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.