Literature DB >> 20868824

The CHADS score role in managing anticoagulation after surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Niv Ad1, Linda Henry, Karen Schlauch, Sari D Holmes, Sharon Hunt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Managing anticoagulation after surgical ablation is challenging, especially when sinus rhythm has been restored and the left atrial appendage has been surgically managed. The study purpose was to examine the applicability of the CHADS(2) in determining anticoagulation strategies after surgical ablation. CHADS(2) is a scoring system (0 to 6) used to indicate a patient's risk for a thromboembolic stroke and used for anticoagulation strategies. One point is given for any of the following conditions: C, congestive heart failure; H, hypertension; A, age 75 years old or greater; D, diabetes mellitus; and S, stroke which receives 2 points. A score of 2 or greater is an indication for a patient to be placed on warfarin unless otherwise contraindicated.
METHODS: A prospective, longitudinally designed study where CHADS(2) was calculated for all patients (n = 385). Clinical data on rhythm, anticoagulation medication, bleeding, and embolic stroke-transient ischemic attack (TIA) was obtained every 3 months. Logistic regression models were used to determine significant predictors of either event.
RESULTS: Of the 385 patients, 17% presented with a history of stroke-TIA. In a mean follow-up of 32.77 ± 16.33 months, embolic stroke-TIA events occurred in 4 patients (4.2 first events per 1,000 patient years) and bleeding events occurred in 69 patients (72.8 first events per 1,000 patient years). There was no significant difference in mean CHADS(2) between the stroke event and nonevent group (0.75 vs 1.46, respectively; p = 0.21), but there was a significant difference in CHADS(2) between the major bleed event group and the nonevent group (2.31 vs 1.41, respectively; p < 0.003). The logistic regression model was not predictive of stroke-TIA, but was significantly predictive of bleeding events (χ(2) = 10.30, p < 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: The number of thromboembolic events after surgical ablation procedure is low and appears unrelated to the CHADS(2). This, together with the higher rate of bleeding, raises questions regarding the applicability of the CHADS(2) for patients after surgical ablation. A randomized study is required to define the risks and anticoagulation strategies for patients after surgical ablation.
Copyright © 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20868824     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.05.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  5 in total

1.  The impact of CHADS2 score on late stroke after the Cox maze procedure.

Authors:  Mitchell Pet; Jason O Robertson; Marci Bailey; Tracey J Guthrie; Marc R Moon; Jennifer S Lawton; Andrew Rinne; Ralph J Damiano; Hersh S Maniar
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 2.  The efficacy of intraoperative atrial radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation during concomitant cardiac surgery-the Surgical Atrial Fibrillation Suppression (SAFS) Study.

Authors:  Rick A Veasey; Oliver R Segal; Janet K Large; Michael E Lewis; Uday H Trivedi; Andrew S Cohen; Jonathan A J Hyde; A Neil Sulke
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2011-06-18       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  Left atrial appendage occlusion and ligation devices: what is available, how to implement them, and how to manage and avoid complications.

Authors:  Arash Aryana; Eduardo B Saad; André d'Avila
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2012-10

4.  Variations in Anticoagulation Practices Following the Maze Procedure.

Authors:  Jennifer Chung; Magdi Sami; Carole Albert; Benoit De Varennes
Journal:  J Atr Fibrillation       Date:  2015-10-31

5.  Predicting Thromboembolic and Bleeding Event Risk in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ethan D Borre; Adam Goode; Giselle Raitz; Bimal Shah; Angela Lowenstern; Ranee Chatterjee; Lauren Sharan; Nancy M Allen LaPointe; Roshini Yapa; J Kelly Davis; Kathryn Lallinger; Robyn Schmidt; Andrzej Kosinski; Sana M Al-Khatib; Gillian D Sanders
Journal:  Thromb Haemost       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 6.681

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.