Aims Prior studies suggested that the risks of ischaemic stroke and bleeding in patients of Asian race with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be higher than that of non-Asians. In the analysis of ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, we compared clinical outcomes, edoxaban concentration, and anti-factor Xa (anti-FXa) activity, between Asian and non-Asian races. Methods and results There were 2909 patients of Asian race and 18 195 non-Asian race in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial. The risks of thromboembolism and bleeding events were compared for Asians and non-Asians treated with warfarin. The trough levels of edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity were also compared and correlated with the efficacy and safety of edoxaban vs. warfarin. Compared to non-Asian patients, the Asian population was on average 2 years younger and 20 kg lighter. In the warfarin group, the adjusted risk of ischaemic stroke did not differ significantly for patients of Asian and non-Asian race [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.12, P = 0.56). Asians treated with warfarin had a higher-adjusted risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH: aHR 1.71, P = 0.03) compared with non-Asians. The trough edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity were 20–25% lower for Asians compared with non-Asians. Compared to warfarin, higher dose edoxaban significantly reduced ICH while preserving the efficacy of stroke prevention in both Asians and non-Asians. Two of three net clinical outcomes appeared to be more favourably reduced with edoxaban in Asians compared with non-Asians (P int = 0.063 for primary, 0.037 for secondary, and 0.032 for third net clinical outcomes, respectively). Conclusion Compared to warfarin, higher dose edoxaban preserved the efficacy for stroke prevention and was associated with a favourable safety profile for Asians, which may be due to the lower trough edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity achieved in patients of Asian race.
BackgroundCardiology has advanced guideline development and quality measurement. Recognizing the substantial benefits of guideline‐directed medical therapy, this study aims to measure and explain apparent deviations in heart failure (HF) guideline adherence by clinicians at hospital discharge and describe any impact on readmission rates.Methods and ResultsThe extent of decongestion and prescription of neurohormonal therapy were recorded prospectively for 226 HF discharges, including 132 (58%) from an academic hospital and 94 (42%) from a community hospital. Among all discharges, 25% were discharged with residual congestion (30% academic versus 18% community, P=0.070). Among discharges of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, 37% (45% academic versus 18% community, P<0.001) were discharged without β‐blocker therapy or with lower doses than at admission. Moreover, 46% of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (48% academic versus 39% community, P=0.390) were discharged without an angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker or with lower doses than at admission. Renal dysfunction was the most common reason for discharge with congestion, and hypotension the most common reason for discharge with no or decreased neurohormonal therapy. There was a trend toward higher 90‐day readmission rates after discharge with residual congestion.ConclusionsClinicians frequently deviate from guidelines in both academic and community hospitals; however, this deviation may not always indicate poor quality. Application of guidelines recommended for stable populations is increasingly limited for hospitalized patients by hypotension, renal dysfunction, and inotrope use. Patients with renal dysfunction, hypotension, and recent inotrope use merit further study to determine best practices and possibly to adjust quality metrics for HF severity.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.