Among patients with atrial fibrillation who had undergone PCI, the risk of bleeding was lower among those who received dual therapy with dabigatran and a P2Y inhibitor than among those who received triple therapy with warfarin, a P2Y inhibitor, and aspirin. Dual therapy was noninferior to triple therapy with respect to the risk of thromboembolic events. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-DUAL PCI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02164864 .).

AimsThe introduction of non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which differ from the earlier vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatments, has changed the approach to stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). GLORIA-AF is a prospective, global registry programme describing the selection of antithrombotic treatment in newly diagnosed AF patients at risk of stroke. It comprises three phases: Phase I, before the introduction of NOACs; Phase II, during the time of the introduction of dabigatran, the first NOAC; and Phase III, once NOACs have been established in clinical practice.Methods and resultsIn Phase I, 1063 patients were eligible from the 1100 enrolled (54.3% male; median age 70 years); patients were from China (67.1%), Europe (EU; 27.4%), and the Middle East (ME; 5.6%). The majority of patients using VKAs had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2; 86.5%); 13.5% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Vitamin K antagonist use was higher for persistent/permanent AF (47.7%) than that for paroxysmal (23.9%). Most patients in China were treated with antiplatelet agents (53.7%) vs. 27.1% in EU and 28.8% in ME. In China, 25.9% of patients had no antithrombotic therapy, vs. 8.6% in EU and 8.5% in ME.ConclusionPhase I of GLORIA-AF shows that VKAs were mostly used in patients with persistent/permanent (vs. paroxysmal) AF and in those with high stroke risk. Furthermore, there were meaningful geographical differences in the use of VKA therapy in the era before the availability of NOACs, including a much lower use of VKAs in China, where most patients either received antiplatelet agents or no antithrombotic treatment.

Background and Purpose: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) may increase the risk of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Guidelines suggest anticoagulation may be more effective than antiplatelets in preventing stroke in patients with ESUS and PFO when interventional closure is not performed. Methods: Patients with ESUS randomized to dabigatran (150/110 mg BID) or aspirin (100 mg QD) from the RE-SPECT ESUS study (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) were included. The rate of recurrent stroke (primary end point) and ischemic stroke was reported for patients with and without baseline PFO. A meta-analysis comparing the effects of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy on ischemic stroke in patients with PFO was updated to include RE-SPECT ESUS. Results: PFO was present in 680 of 5388 (12.6%) patients with documented PFO status. The risk of recurrent stroke with dabigatran versus aspirin was similar in patients with and without PFO ( P for interaction, 0.8290). In patients with PFO, the meta-analysis found no statistically significant difference between anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.43–1.14]) for ischemic stroke. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to recommend anticoagulation over antiplatelet therapy for patients with ESUS and a PFO. More data are needed to guide antithrombotic therapy in this population. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

Aims After percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation, safety and efficacy with dabigatran dual therapy were evaluated in pre-specified subgroups of patients undergoing PCI due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or elective PCI, and those receiving ticagrelor or clopidogrel treatment. Methods and results In the RE-DUAL PCI trial, 2725 patients were randomized to dabigatran 110 mg or 150 mg with P2Y12 inhibitor, or warfarin with P2Y12 inhibitor and aspirin. Mean follow-up was 14 months, 50.5% had ACS, and 12% received ticagrelor. The risk of the primary endpoint, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding event, was reduced with both dabigatran dual therapies vs. warfarin triple therapy in patients with ACS [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), 0.47 (0.35–0.63) for 110 mg and 0.67 (0.50–0.90) for 150 mg]; elective PCI [0.57 (0.43–0.76) for 110 mg and 0.76 (0.56–1.03) for 150 mg]; receiving ticagrelor [0.46 (0.28–0.76) for 110 mg and 0.59 (0.34–1.04) for 150 mg]; or clopidogrel [0.51 (0.41–0.64) for 110 mg and 0.73 (0.58–0.91) for 150 mg], all interaction P -values >0.10. Overall, dabigatran dual therapy was comparable to warfarin triple therapy for the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, or unplanned revascularization, with minor variations across the subgroups, all interaction P -values >0.10. Conclusion The benefits of both dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg dual therapy compared with warfarin triple therapy in reducing bleeding risks were consistent across subgroups of patients with or without ACS, and patients treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel.

Background: A proportion of patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) have silent atrial fibrillation (AF) or develop AF after the initial evaluation. Better understanding of risk for development of AF is critical to implement optimal monitoring strategies with the goal of preventing recurrent stroke due to underlying AF. The RE-SPECT ESUS trial provides an opportunity to assess predictors for developing AF and associated recurrent stroke. Methods: RE-SPECT ESUS was a randomized, controlled trial (564 sites, 42 countries) assessing dabigatran versus aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with ESUS. Of 5390 patients enrolled and followed for a median of 19 months, 403 (7.5%) were found to develop AF reported as an adverse event or using cardiac monitoring per standard clinical care. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to define predictors of AF. Results: In the multivariable model, older age (odds ratio [OR] for 10-year increase 1.99 [1.78-2.23]; P<0.001), hypertension (1.36 [1.03-1.79]; P=0.0304), diabetes (OR 0.74 [0.56-0.96]; P=0.022), and body mass index (OR for 5-unit increase 1.29 [1.16-1.43]; P<0.001) were independent predictors of AF during the study. In a sensitivity analysis restricted to 1117 patients with baseline N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measurements, only older age and higher NT-proBNP were significant independent predictors of AF. Performances of several published predictive models were assessed, including the HAVOC and CHA2DS2-VASc scores, and higher scores were associated with higher rates of developing AF. Conclusions: Besides age as the most important variable, several other factors, including hypertension, higher body mass index, and lack of diabetes, are independent predictors of AF after ESUS. When baseline NT-proBNP was available, only older age and elevation of this biomarker were predictive of subsequent AF. Understanding who is at higher risk of developing AF will assist in identifying patients who may benefit from more intense, long-term cardiac monitoring.

Aims To describe heparin dosing requirements in patients who underwent catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation with uninterrupted anticoagulation using dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran) or warfarin to attain therapeutic activated clotting time (ACT) in the RE-CIRCUIT® study. The RE-CIRCUIT study showed significantly fewer major bleeding events in the dabigatran vs. warfarin treatment group. Unfractionated heparin was administered during the procedure to maintain ACT >300 s. Methods and results Patients were randomly assigned to dabigatran 150 mg bid or international normalized ratio-adjusted warfarin. Ablation was performed with uninterrupted anticoagulation and continued for 8 weeks after the procedure. Heparin was administered after placement of femoral sheaths before or immediately after transseptal puncture. Ablation was performed in 635 patients (dabigatran, 317; warfarin, 318); data were available from 396 patients administered heparin (dabigatran, 191; warfarin, 205). Most frequent time window from last dose of study drug to septal puncture was 0 to <4 h in the dabigatran (41.3%) and 16 to <24 h in the warfarin arms (44.7%). Overall mean (standard deviation) heparin dose was similar between the dabigatran and warfarin groups [12 402 (10 721) vs. 11 910 (8359) IU, respectively]. Heparin dosing requirement to reach therapeutic ACT was lowest when time from last dose of dabigatran to septal puncture was 0 to <4 h. Conclusion Patients treated with dabigatran required a similar amount of unfractionated heparin as those treated with warfarin to achieve an ACT of >300 s during ablation. More heparin units were required when the time from the last dose of dabigatran to septal puncture increased.

Background and Purpose— The RE-SPECT ESUS trial (Randomized, Double-Blind, Evaluation in Secondary Stroke Prevention Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Thrombin Inhibitor Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid in Patients With Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source) tested the hypothesis that dabigatran would be superior to aspirin for the prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. This exploratory subgroup analysis investigates the impact of age, renal function (both predefined), and dabigatran dose (post hoc) on the rates of recurrent stroke and major bleeding. Methods— RE-SPECT ESUS was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of dabigatran 150 or 110 mg (for patients aged ≥75 years and/or with creatinine clearance 30 to <50 mL/minute) twice daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. Results— The trial, which enrolled 5390 patients from December 2014 to January 2018, did not demonstrate superiority of dabigatran versus aspirin for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. However, among the population qualifying for the lower dabigatran dose, the rate of recurrent stroke was reduced with dabigatran versus aspirin (7.4% versus 13.0%; hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.39–0.82]; interaction P =0.01). This was driven mainly by the subgroup aged ≥75 years (7.8% versus 12.4%; hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43–0.94]; interaction P =0.10). Stroke rates tended to be lower with dabigatran versus aspirin with declining renal function. Risks for major bleeding were similar between treatments, irrespective of renal function, but with a trend for lower bleeding rates with dabigatran versus aspirin in older patients. Conclusions— In subgroup analyses of RE-SPECT ESUS, dabigatran reduced the rate of recurrent stroke compared with aspirin in patients qualifying for the lower dose of dabigatran. These results are hypothesis-generating. Aspirin remains the standard antithrombotic treatment for patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source. Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02239120.

This study-based meta-analysis shows that it may be both safer and more effective to use NOACs compared with VKAs to treat patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and concomitant aspirin therapy.