No abstract

No abstract

Aims The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and develop a risk score that would provide an effective tool for the clinical assessment of GIB. Methods This was a multicentre retrospective analysis of clinical and follow‐up data of patients treated with DOACs. The score was developed through logistic regression. The performance of score was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity and Hosmer–Lemeshow test. Results The 11 903 patients had a mean age of 65.1 years. In multivariate analysis, age ≥65 years, alcohol use, history of peptic ulcer, history of major bleeding, abnormal liver function or renal function, cancer, platelet count <100 × 109/L, anaemia, and concurrent antiplatelet agent or non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug treatment were independent risk factors for GIB, and concurrent treatment with gastrointestinal protective agents were a protective factor. The Alfalfa‐DOAC‐GIB score was constructed using these 12 factors. The AUC of the Alfalfa‐DOAC‐GIB score was 0.77 (95% CI 0.74–0.81), which was higher than that of the HAS‐BLED score (0.69; 95% CI 0.65–0.72) and the New score (0.65; 95% CI 0.61–0.68). Conclusions Based on 12 factors, we developed a gastrointestinal bleeding risk score. The newly developed Alfalfa‐DOAC‐GIB score has better predictive value than the HAS‐BLED score and the New score, and might be an effective tool to help reduce the occurrence of GIB in patients using DOACs.

No abstract

Whether there are differences in direct oral anticoagulants efficacy and safety in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) combined with hypertension is unclear.We therefore conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study to assess the differences in the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with AF combined with hypertension. This multicenter retrospective cohort study was based on data from 15 centers in China and included 2086 patients with AF. We divided the patients into dabigatran and rivaroxaban groups according to their direct oral anticoagulants. Propensity score matching was used to balance the covariates between the groups. Due to our limited sample size, the number of cases of some clinical events with low incidence was small. During a mean follow-up period of 10 months, a total of 268 (12.9%) bleeding events occurred, including 27 (1.3%) major bleeding events and 241 (11.6%) minor bleeding events, and 45 (2.2%) thromboembolic events. In patients with AF combined with hypertension, rivaroxaban was associated with a higher major bleeding incidence than dabigatran (odds ratio [OR], 2.89 [95% confidence interval [CI, 1.22-6.87]; P = .012). In contrast, the risk of thromboembolism and minor bleeding was similar for rivaroxaban (OR, 0.55 [95%CI, 0.29-1.01]; P = .069) and dabigatran (OR, 0.82 [95%CI,]; P = .150). Based on the results of this study, in patients with AF and hypertension treated with direct oral anticoagulants, the incidence of thromboembolism and minor bleeding was not statistically different between dabigatran and rivaroxaban, but compared with rivaroxaban, dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding.

Background Based on the few available studies on the prognostic benefit of using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) after atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prognostic differences between patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and those without RFA taking DOACs. Methods This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study enrolling 6137 patients with non-valvular AF (NVAF) at 15 hospitals in China. Patient information was collected through a mean follow-up of 10 months and medical record queries. Clinical outcomes included major bleeding, total bleeding, thrombosis, all-cause death, and a composite endpoint of bleeding, thrombosis, and all-cause death. Results After adjusting for confounders and propensity score matching (PSM), patients with RFA of NVAF had a significantly lower risk of major bleeding [OR 0.278 (95% CI, 0.150-0.515), P<0.001], thrombosis [OR 0.535 (95% CI, 0.316-0.908), P=0.020] and the composite endpoint [ OR 0.835 (95% CI, 0.710-0.982), P=0.029]. In the RFA PSM cohort, dabigatran was associated with reduced all-cause death in patients with RFA of NVAF [OR 0.420 (95% CI, 0.212-0.831), P=0.010]. In the no RFA PSM cohort, rivaroxaban was associated with a reduction in major bleeding [OR 0.521 (95% CI, 0.403-0.673), P<0.001], total bleeding [OR 0.114 (95% CI, 0.049-0.266), P<0.001], and the composite endpoint [OR 0.659 ( 95% CI, 0.535-0.811), P<0.001]. Conclusion Among patients with NVAF treated with DOACs, RFA was a negative correlate of major bleeding, thrombosis, and composite endpoints but was not associated with total bleeding or all-cause mortality.

No abstract

No abstract