John J You1, Daniel E Singer2, Patricia A Howard3, Deirdre A Lane4, Mark H Eckman5, Margaret C Fang6, Elaine M Hylek7, Sam Schulman8, Alan S Go9, Michael Hughes10, Frederick A Spencer8, Warren J Manning11, Jonathan L Halperin12, Gregory Y H Lip13. 1. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 2. Department of Medicine, General Medicine Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Harvard Medical School, and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, General Medicine Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 3. School of Pharmacy, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS. 4. University of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, England. 5. Department of Clinical Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Center for Clinical Effectiveness, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH. 6. Department of Medicine, Division of Hospital Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. 7. Boston University Medical Center Research Unit, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston, MA. 8. Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 9. Comprehensive Clinical Research Unit, Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA. 10. Decision Resources Inc, London, England. 11. Section of Non-invasive Cardiac Imaging, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA. 12. The Cardiovascular Institute, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY. 13. University of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, England. Electronic address: g.y.h.lip@bham.ac.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The risk of stroke varies considerably across different groups of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Antithrombotic prophylaxis for stroke is associated with an increased risk of bleeding. We provide recommendations for antithrombotic treatment based on net clinical benefit for patients with AF at varying levels of stroke risk and in a number of common clinical scenarios. METHODS: We used the methods described in the Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines article of this supplement. RESULTS: For patients with nonrheumatic AF, including those with paroxysmal AF, who are (1) at low risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack] score of 0), we suggest no therapy rather than antithrombotic therapy, and for patients choosing antithrombotic therapy, we suggest aspirin rather than oral anticoagulation or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel; (2) at intermediate risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) score of 1), we recommend oral anticoagulation rather than no therapy, and we suggest oral anticoagulation rather than aspirin or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel; and (3) at high risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) score of ≥ 2), we recommend oral anticoagulation rather than no therapy, aspirin, or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. Where we recommend or suggest in favor of oral anticoagulation, we suggest dabigatran 150 mg bid rather than adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonist therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Oral anticoagulation is the optimal choice of antithrombotic therapy for patients with AF at high risk of stroke (CHADS(2) score of ≥ 2). At lower levels of stroke risk, antithrombotic treatment decisions will require a more individualized approach.
BACKGROUND: The risk of stroke varies considerably across different groups of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Antithrombotic prophylaxis for stroke is associated with an increased risk of bleeding. We provide recommendations for antithrombotic treatment based on net clinical benefit for patients with AF at varying levels of stroke risk and in a number of common clinical scenarios. METHODS: We used the methods described in the Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines article of this supplement. RESULTS: For patients with nonrheumatic AF, including those with paroxysmal AF, who are (1) at low risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack] score of 0), we suggest no therapy rather than antithrombotic therapy, and for patients choosing antithrombotic therapy, we suggest aspirin rather than oral anticoagulation or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel; (2) at intermediate risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) score of 1), we recommend oral anticoagulation rather than no therapy, and we suggest oral anticoagulation rather than aspirin or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel; and (3) at high risk of stroke (eg, CHADS(2) score of ≥ 2), we recommend oral anticoagulation rather than no therapy, aspirin, or combination therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. Where we recommend or suggest in favor of oral anticoagulation, we suggest dabigatran 150 mg bid rather than adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonist therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Oral anticoagulation is the optimal choice of antithrombotic therapy for patients with AF at high risk of stroke (CHADS(2) score of ≥ 2). At lower levels of stroke risk, antithrombotic treatment decisions will require a more individualized approach.
Authors: Debra Hoppensteadt; Jawed Fareed; Allan L Klein; Susan E Jasper; Carolyn Apperson-Hansen; Elizabeth A Lieber; William E Katz; Joseph F Malouf; Marcus F Stoddard; Linda A Pape Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Stefan H Ostermayer; Mark Reisman; Paul H Kramer; Ray V Matthews; William A Gray; Peter C Block; Heyder Omran; Antonio L Bartorelli; Paolo Della Bella; Carlo Di Mario; Carlo Pappone; Paul N Casale; Jeffrey W Moses; Athena Poppas; David O Williams; Bernhard Meier; Allan Skanes; Paul S Teirstein; Michael D Lesh; Toshiko Nakai; Yves Bayard; Kai Billinger; Thomas Trepels; Ulrike Krumsdorf; Horst Sievert Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-07-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Rangadham Nagarakanti; Michael D Ezekowitz; Jonas Oldgren; Sean Yang; Michael Chernick; Timothy H Aikens; Greg Flaker; Josep Brugada; Gabriel Kamensky; Amit Parekh; Paul A Reilly; Salim Yusuf; Stuart J Connolly Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-01-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Brian F Gage; Yan Yan; Paul E Milligan; Amy D Waterman; Robert Culverhouse; Michael W Rich; Martha J Radford Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Carl van Walraven; Robert G Hart; Daniel E Singer; Andreas Laupacis; Stuart Connolly; Palle Petersen; Peter J Koudstaal; Yuchiao Chang; Beppie Hellemons Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-11-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: C Morocutti; G Amabile; F Fattapposta; A Nicolosi; S Matteoli; M Trappolini; G Cataldo; G Milanesi; M Lavezzari; F Pamparana; S Coccheri Journal: Stroke Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Stuart J Connolly; Janice Pogue; John Eikelboom; Gregory Flaker; Patrick Commerford; Maria Grazia Franzosi; Jeffrey S Healey; Salim Yusuf Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-10-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Martín Ruiz Ortiz; Elías Romo; Dolores Mesa; Mónica Delgado; Manuel Anguita; Juan C Castillo; José M Arizón; José Suárez de Lezo Journal: Cardiology Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 1.869
Authors: Renato D Lopes; Richard C Becker; L Kristin Newby; Eric D Peterson; Elaine M Hylek; Robert Giugliano; Christopher B Granger; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Antonio C Carvalho; Otavio Berwanger; Roberto R Giraldez; Gilson Soares Feitosa-Filho; Marcia M Barbosa; Maria da Consolacao V Moreira; Renato A K Kalil; Marildes Freitas; Joao Carlos de Campos Guerra; Marcio Vinicius Lins Barros; Thiago da Rocha Rodrigues; Antonio C Lopes; David A Garcia Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 2.300