No abstract

AimsRandomized trials showed non-inferior or superior results of the non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with warfarin. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran (direct thrombin inhibitor) vs. acenocoumarol (vitamin K antagonist) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in daily clinical practice.Methods and resultsIn this observational study, we evaluated all consecutive patients who started anticoagulation because of AF in our outpatient clinic from 2010 to 2013. Data were collected from electronic patient charts. Primary outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding. Propensity score matching was applied to address the non-randomized design. In total, 920 consecutive AF patients were enrolled (442 dabigatran, 478 acenocoumarol), of which 2 × 383 were available for analysis after propensity score matching. Mean follow-up duration was 1.5 ± 0.56 year. The mean calculated stroke risk according to the CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.5%/year in dabigatran vs. 3.7%/year acenocoumarol-treated patients. The actual incidence rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 0.8%/year [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2–2.1] vs. 1.0%/year (95% CI: 0.4–2.1), respectively. Multivariable analysis confirmed this lower but non-significant risk in dabigatran vs. acenocoumarol after adjustment for the CHA2DS2-VASc score [hazard ratio (HR)dabigatran = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.20–2.63, P = 0.61]. According to the HAS-BLED score, the mean calculated bleeding risk was 1.7%/year in both groups. Actual incidence rate of major bleeding was 2.1%/year (95% CI: 1.0–3.8) in the dabigatran vs. 4.3%/year (95% CI: 2.9–6.2) in acenocoumarol. This over 50% reduction remained significant after adjustment for the HAS-BLED score (HRdabigatran = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22–0.93, P = 0.031).ConclusionIn ‘real-world’ patients with AF, dabigatran appears to be as effective, but significantly safer than acenocoumarol.

We determined the efficiency of a screening protocol based on coronary calcium scores (CCS) compared with exercise testing in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD), a normal ECG and troponin levels. Three-hundred-and-four patients were enrolled in a screening protocol including CCS by electron beam computed tomography (Agatston score), and exercise testing. Decision-making was based on CCS. When CCS≥400, coronary angiography (CAG) was recommended. When CCS<10, patients were discharged. Exercise tests were graded as positive, negative or nondiagnostic. The combined endpoint was defined as coronary event or obstructive CAD at CAG. During 12±4 months, CCS≥400, 10–399 and <10 were found in 42, 103 and 159 patients and the combined endpoint occurred in 24 (57%), 14 (14%) and 0 patients (0%), respectively. In 22 patients (7%), myocardial perfusion scintigraphy was performed instead of exercise testing due to the inability to perform an exercise test. A positive, nondiagnostic and negative exercise test result was found in 37, 76 and 191 patients, and the combined endpoint occurred in 11 (30%), 15 (20%) and 12 patients (6%), respectively. Receiver-operator characteristics analysis showed that the area under the curve of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85–0.93) for CCS was superior to 0.69 (95% CI: 0.61–0.78) for exercise testing ( P <0.0001). In conclusion, measurement of CCS is an appropriate initial screening test in a well-defined low-risk population with suspected CAD.

This study supports the use of statins in microalbuminuric subjects with the metabolic syndrome to reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiac events.

No abstract