Background : The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of oral anticoagulant drugs and time in therapeutic range in patients receiving warfarin in addition to the epidemiological trial of non-valvular atrial fibrillation previously conducted in Turkey (The Atrial Fibrillation: Epidemiological Registry trial). Furthermore, the prevalence of major adverse events and mortality rates of the patients were evaluated during the long-term follow-up period. Methods: We created a national data registry for non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients, reflecting all geographic regions by population density. In that context, the study included all consecutive atrial fibrillation patients older than 18 years of age who were admitted to the cardiology outpatient clinic except for patients those with prosthetic heart valves and rheumatic mitral valve stenosis. Results: This study included 2592 patients from 35 different centers. The mean age was 68.7 ± 11.1 years, and 55.5% of the patients were female. The most common comorbid diseases were chronic kidney disease (69%) and hypertension (65.5%). The time in therapeutic range rate in the general population was 40%, and the mortality rate at 5-year follow-up was 29.4%. Conclusion: The Atrial Fibrillation: Epidemiological Registry 2 study showed higher use of anticoagulant in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients than in previous national studies. Furthermore, this study demonstrated that most of the non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients are in the high-risk group and the time in therapeutic range rates are still low in Turkey. As a result, this is a significant reason for switching from warfarin to non-K vitamin-dependent new oral anticoagulant treatments.

Background: It is unclear whether warfarin treatment with high time in therapeutic range (TTR) is as effective and safe as non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). It is crucial to compare warfarin with effective TTR and NOACs to predict long-term adverse events in patients with atrial fibrillation. Aims:We aimed to compare the long-term follow-up results of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who use vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) with effective TTR and NOACs.Methods: A total of 1140 patients were followed at 35 different centers for five years. During the follow-up period, the international normalized ratio (INR) values were studied at least 4 times a year, and the TTR values were calculated according to the Roosendaal method. The effective TTR level was accepted as >60% as recommended by the guidelines. There were 254 patients in the effective TTR group and 886 patients in the NOAC group. Ischemic cerebrovascular disease/transient ischemic attack (CVD/TIA), intracranial bleeding, and mortality were considered primary endpoints based on one-year and five-year follow-ups.Results: Ischemic CVD/TIA (3.9% vs. 6.2%; P = 0.17) and intracranial bleeding (0.4% vs. 0.5%; P = 0.69), the one-year mortality rate (7.1% vs. 8.1%; P = 0.59), the five-year mortality rate (24% vs. 26.3%; P = 0.46) were not different between the effective TTR and NOACs groups during the follow-up, respectively. The CHA2DS2-VASC score was similar between the warfarin with effective TTR group and the NOAC group (3 [2-4] vs. 3 [2-4]; P = 0.17, respectively). Additionally, survival free-time did not differ between the warfarin with effective TTR group and each NOAC in the Kaplan-Meier analysis (dabigatran; P = 0.59, rivaroxaban; P = 0.34, apixaban; P = 0.26, and edoxaban; P = 0.14). Conclusion:There was no significant difference in primary outcomes between the effective TTR and NOAC groups in AF patients.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background The incidence of postoperative complications following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) procedures in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs has not been studied sufficiently. Here we present a comparison of complications after CIED implantations. Methods Using an observational study design, the study included 1807 patients with a taking antiplatelet drugs (n: 1601), nonvitamin K anticoagulants (NOAC) (n: 136), and warfarin (n: 70) undergoing CIED surgery. Primary endpoint was accepted as cumulative events including composite of clinically significant hematoma (CSH), pericardial effusion or tamponade, pneumothorax, and infection related to device system. Secondary outcomes included each compenent of cumulative events. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of cumulative events. Results The overall cumulative event rate was 3.7% (67 of 1807). Cumulative events occured 3.1% (50 of 1601) in the antiplatelet, 5.1% (7 of 136) NOAC, and 14.3% (10 of 70) warfarin groups (p < 0.001). CSH occurred in 2 of 70 patients (2.9%) in the warfarin group, as compared with 5 of 1601 (0.3%) in the antiplatelet group (p: 0.032). However, no significant differences were found between NOAC and warfarin groups in terms of CSH (0.7% vs. 2.9% respectively, p: 0.267). Warfarin treatment was an independent predictor of cumulative events and increased 2.9‐fold the risk of cumulative events. Major surgical complications were rare and did not differ significantly between the study groups. Conclusions The incidence and severity of complications may be lower in patients treated with periprocedurally antiplatelet or NOAC therapy when compared with warfarin therapy. Further randomized control studies are required to confirm our findings.

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to compare the traditional radial artery, distal radial artery, and transfemoral artery, which are vascular access sites for coronary angiography, in terms of pain level using the visual analog scale. METHODS: Between April 2021 and May 2022, consecutive patients from three centers were included in our study. A total of 540 patients, 180 from each of the traditional radial artery, distal radial artery , and transfemoral artery groups, were included. The visual analog scale was applied to the patients as soon as they were taken to bed. RESULTS: When the visual analog scale was compared between the groups, it was found to be significantly different (transfemoral artery: 2.7±1.6, traditional radial artery: 3.9±1.9, and distal radial artery: 4.9±2.1, respectively, p<0.001). When the patients were classified as mild, moderate, and severe based on the visual analog scale score, a significant difference was found between the groups in terms of body mass index, process time, access time, and number of punctures (p<0.001). Based on the receiver operating characteristic analysis, body mass index>29.8 kg/m 2 predicted severe pain with 72.5% sensitivity and 73.2% specificity [(area under the curve: 0.770, 95%CI: 0.724–0.815, p<0.0001)]. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found that the femoral approach caused less access site pain and a high body mass index predicts severe pain.

No abstract