Literature DB >> 24035703

Joint use of cardio-embolic and bleeding risk scores in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation.

Maura Marcucci1, Alessandro Nobili, Mauro Tettamanti, Alfonso Iorio, Luca Pasina, Codjo D Djade, Carlotta Franchi, Alessandra Marengoni, Francesco Salerno, Salvatore Corrao, Francesco Violi, Pier Mannuccio Mannucci.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Scores for cardio-embolic and bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation are described in the literature. However, it is not clear how they co-classify elderly patients with multimorbidity, nor whether and how they affect the physician's decision on thromboprophylaxis.
METHODS: Four scores for cardio-embolic and bleeding risks were retrospectively calculated for ≥ 65 year old patients with atrial fibrillation enrolled in the REPOSI registry. The co-classification of patients according to risk categories based on different score combinations was described and the relationship between risk categories tested. The association between the antithrombotic therapy received and the scores was investigated by logistic regressions and CART analyses.
RESULTS: At admission, among 543 patients the median scores (range) were: CHADS2 2 (0-6), CHA2DS2-VASc 4 (1-9), HEMORR2HAGES 3 (0-7), HAS-BLED 2 (1-6). Most of the patients were at high cardio-embolic/high-intermediate bleeding risk (70.5% combining CHADS2 and HEMORR2HAGES, 98.3% combining CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED). 50-60% of patients were classified in a cardio-embolic risk category higher than the bleeding risk category. In univariate and multivariable analyses, a higher bleeding score was negatively associated with warfarin prescription, and positively associated with aspirin prescription. The cardio-embolic scores were associated with the therapeutic choice only after adjusting for bleeding score or age.
CONCLUSION: REPOSI patients represented a population at high cardio-embolic and bleeding risks, but most of them were classified by the scores as having a higher cardio-embolic than bleeding risk. Yet, prescription and type of antithrombotic therapy appeared to be primarily dictated by the bleeding risk.
© 2013.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Atrial fibrillation; Bleeding risk; Cardioembolic risk; Elderly; Prediction guides; Thromboprophylaxis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24035703     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2013.08.697

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Intern Med        ISSN: 0953-6205            Impact factor:   4.487


  5 in total

1.  Underuse of Oral Anticoagulants and Inappropriate Prescription of Antiplatelet Therapy in Older Inpatients with Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Lorette Averlant; Grégoire Ficheur; Laurie Ferret; Stéphane Boulé; François Puisieux; Michel Luyckx; Julien Soula; Alexandre Georges; Régis Beuscart; Emmanuel Chazard; Jean-Baptiste Beuscart
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 2.  Multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the elderly: lessons from REPOSI.

Authors:  Pier Mannuccio Mannucci; Alessandro Nobili
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 3.397

3.  Characterization of patients with atrial fibrillation not treated with oral anticoagulants.

Authors:  Cecilia Johansson; Lovisa Hägg; Lars Johansson; Jan-Håkan Jansson
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 2.581

4.  Barriers to prescribing oral anticoagulants to inpatients aged 80 years and older with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Xin Xia; Lishuang Wang; Taiping Lin; Jirong Yue; Zhonghua Yang; Chongqing Mi; Zaibo Liao; Yanyu Chen; Ning Ge; Chenkai Wu
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 3.921

5.  SUPPORT-AF: Piloting a Multi-Faceted, Electronic Medical Record-Based Intervention to Improve Prescription of Anticoagulation.

Authors:  Alok Kapoor; Azraa Amroze; Jessica Golden; Sybil Crawford; Kevin O'Day; Rasha Elhag; Ahmed Nagy; Steve A Lubitz; Jane S Saczynski; Jomol Mathew; David D McManus
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 5.501

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.