PURPOSE: Effective intraprocedural anticoagulation for catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation is critical to minimize the risk of cerebral thromboembolism. The effect of dabigatran on anticoagulation with heparin during the procedure is unknown. This study compares heparin anticoagulation in patients treated with dabigatran vs. patients on uninterrupted warfarin. METHODS: Seventy-six consecutive patients (24 dabigatran and 52 warfarin) subjected to a standard intraprocedural heparin protocol were included. Heparin administration and rapidity and degree of anticoagulation were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Despite greater administration of heparin (52.5 ± 22.0 vs. 33.2 ± 10.1 units kg(-1) h(-1); p < 0.001), the mean (320.3 ± 19.5 s) and peak (358.8 ± 28.6 s) activated clotting time (ACT) for the dabigatran group were significantly lower than for the warfarin group (mean, 362.9 ± 35.9 and peak, 410.4 ± 49.7; p < 0.001). The time from initial heparin bolus to first ACT of ≥300 s in the dabigatran group was more than twice that observed in the warfarin group (45.0 ± 30.4 vs. 20.9 ± 14.5 min; p < 0.001). The time to first ACT of ≥350 s was similarly prolonged (109.1 ± 60.0 vs. 55.2 ± 51.1 min; p < 0.001) in the dabigatran group, with eight patients (33 %) failing to reach this target. Outcome differences persisted following analysis using linear models and Cox proportional hazard regression with adjustment for propensity scores. CONCLUSION: A standard intraprocedural heparin protocol results in delayed and lower levels of anticoagulation as measured by the ACT for patients treated with dabigatran compared with those on uninterrupted warfarin.
PURPOSE: Effective intraprocedural anticoagulation for catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation is critical to minimize the risk of cerebral thromboembolism. The effect of dabigatran on anticoagulation with heparin during the procedure is unknown. This study compares heparin anticoagulation in patients treated with dabigatran vs. patients on uninterrupted warfarin. METHODS: Seventy-six consecutive patients (24 dabigatran and 52 warfarin) subjected to a standard intraprocedural heparin protocol were included. Heparin administration and rapidity and degree of anticoagulation were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Despite greater administration of heparin (52.5 ± 22.0 vs. 33.2 ± 10.1 units kg(-1) h(-1); p < 0.001), the mean (320.3 ± 19.5 s) and peak (358.8 ± 28.6 s) activated clotting time (ACT) for the dabigatran group were significantly lower than for the warfarin group (mean, 362.9 ± 35.9 and peak, 410.4 ± 49.7; p < 0.001). The time from initial heparin bolus to first ACT of ≥300 s in the dabigatran group was more than twice that observed in the warfarin group (45.0 ± 30.4 vs. 20.9 ± 14.5 min; p < 0.001). The time to first ACT of ≥350 s was similarly prolonged (109.1 ± 60.0 vs. 55.2 ± 51.1 min; p < 0.001) in the dabigatran group, with eight patients (33 %) failing to reach this target. Outcome differences persisted following analysis using linear models and Cox proportional hazard regression with adjustment for propensity scores. CONCLUSION: A standard intraprocedural heparin protocol results in delayed and lower levels of anticoagulation as measured by the ACT for patients treated with dabigatran compared with those on uninterrupted warfarin.
Authors: Karl-Heinz Liesenfeld; Hans G Schäfer; Iñaki F Trocóniz; Christiane Tillmann; Bengt I Eriksson; Joachim Stangier Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Joanne van Ryn; Joachim Stangier; Sebastian Haertter; Karl-Heinz Liesenfeld; Wolfgang Wienen; Martin Feuring; Andreas Clemens Journal: Thromb Haemost Date: 2010-03-29 Impact factor: 5.249
Authors: Hakan Oral; Aman Chugh; Mehmet Ozaydin; Eric Good; Jackie Fortino; Sundar Sankaran; Scott Reich; Petar Igic; Darryl Elmouchi; David Tschopp; Alan Wimmer; Sujoya Dey; Thomas Crawford; Frank Pelosi; Krit Jongnarangsin; Frank Bogun; Fred Morady Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-08-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Luigi Di Biase; J David Burkhardt; Prasant Mohanty; Javier Sanchez; Rodney Horton; G Joseph Gallinghouse; Dhanunjay Lakkireddy; Atul Verma; Yaariv Khaykin; Richard Hongo; Steven Hao; Salwa Beheiry; Gemma Pelargonio; Antonio Dello Russo; Michela Casella; Pietro Santarelli; Pasquale Santangeli; Paul Wang; Amin Al-Ahmad; Dimpi Patel; Sakis Themistoclakis; Aldo Bonso; Antonio Rossillo; Andrea Corrado; Antonio Raviele; Jennifer E Cummings; Robert A Schweikert; William R Lewis; Andrea Natale Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-06-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ayman A Hussein; David O Martin; Walid Saliba; Deven Patel; Saima Karim; Omar Batal; Mustafa Banna; Michelle Williams-Andrews; Minerva Sherman; Mohamed Kanj; Mandeep Bhargava; Thomas Dresing; Thomas Callahan; Patrick Tchou; Luigi Di Biase; Salwa Beheiry; Bruce Lindsay; Andrea Natale; Oussama Wazni Journal: Heart Rhythm Date: 2009-07-10 Impact factor: 6.343
Authors: Stuart J Connolly; Michael D Ezekowitz; Salim Yusuf; John Eikelboom; Jonas Oldgren; Amit Parekh; Janice Pogue; Paul A Reilly; Ellison Themeles; Jeanne Varrone; Susan Wang; Marco Alings; Denis Xavier; Jun Zhu; Rafael Diaz; Basil S Lewis; Harald Darius; Hans-Christoph Diener; Campbell D Joyner; Lars Wallentin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-08-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Aref A Bin Abdulhak; Kevin F Kennedy; Sanjaya Gupta; Michael Giocondo; Brian Ramza; Alan P Wimmer Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Amish N Raval; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Mina K Chung; Larry J Diaz-Sandoval; Deborah Diercks; Jonathan P Piccini; Hee Soo Jung; Jeffrey B Washam; Babu G Welch; Allyson R Zazulia; Sean P Collins Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ghada A Bawazeer; Hadeel A Alkofide; Aya A Alsharafi; Nada O Babakr; Arwa M Altorkistani; Tarek S Kashour; Michael Miligkos; Khalid M AlFaleh; Lubna A Al-Ansary Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-10-21
Authors: Giuseppe Santarpia; Salvatore De Rosa; Alberto Polimeni; Salvatore Giampà; Mariella Micieli; Antonio Curcio; Ciro Indolfi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 3.240