Pak-Hei Chan1, Wen-Hua Li2, Jo-Jo Hai1, Esther W Chan3, Ian C K Wong3, Hung-Fat Tse1, Gregory Y H Lip4, Chung-Wah Siu5. 1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China; Department of Echocardiography & Non-invasive Cardiology Laboratory, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Chengdu, China. 3. Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. 4. University of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, City Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. 5. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. Electronic address: cwdsiu@hku.hk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR), albeit the standard measure of quality of anticoagulation control for warfarin, is underused in everyday clinical practice because of its tedious calculation. In contrast, the percentage of international normalized ratio measurements in range (PINRR) is a convenient alternative. Our objective was to investigate the correlation between PINRR and TTR and whether PINRR has clinical utility for prediction of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in a "real-world" atrial fibrillation (AF) cohort. METHODS: This is an observational study based on a hospital-based AF registry. RESULTS: Among 1428 Chinese patients with AF who were taking warfarin (76.2 ± 8.7 years; mean CHA2DS2-VASc, 4.2 ± 1.6 and HAS-BLED, 2.3 ± 0.9), mean and median TTR values were 38.2% ± 24.4% and 38.8% (interquartile range, 17.9% and 56.2%), respectively. Patients with TTR ≥ 65% (14.8%) had a lower annual risk of ischemic stroke (3.04% per year) than did those with TTR < 65% (5.35% per year). Mean and median PINRR were 34.3% ± 17.1% and 34.2% (interquartile range, 22.7% and 46.0%), respectively. TTR significantly correlated with PINRR in a linear fashion (r = 0.81; P < 0.0001). A cutoff of PINRR ≤ 56.1% was a good discriminator of TTR < 65%, with a high sensitivity (98.3%) and positive predictive value (91.9%). The annual ischemic stroke risk in patients with PINRR > 56.1% was 2.56% per year, lower than those with TTR ≥ 65% (3.04% per year). Patients with PINRR > 56.1% had an annual incidence of intracranial hemorrhage comparable to those with TTR ≥ 65% (0.49% per year vs 0.68% per year). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AF who are taking warfarin, the PINRR is a user-friendly alternative to TTR, having a high sensitivity and positive predictive value in predicting TTR. As with TTR, PINRR is associated with clinical adverse events, ie, ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage.
BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR), albeit the standard measure of quality of anticoagulation control for warfarin, is underused in everyday clinical practice because of its tedious calculation. In contrast, the percentage of international normalized ratio measurements in range (PINRR) is a convenient alternative. Our objective was to investigate the correlation between PINRR and TTR and whether PINRR has clinical utility for prediction of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in a "real-world" atrial fibrillation (AF) cohort. METHODS: This is an observational study based on a hospital-based AF registry. RESULTS: Among 1428 Chinese patients with AF who were taking warfarin (76.2 ± 8.7 years; mean CHA2DS2-VASc, 4.2 ± 1.6 and HAS-BLED, 2.3 ± 0.9), mean and median TTR values were 38.2% ± 24.4% and 38.8% (interquartile range, 17.9% and 56.2%), respectively. Patients with TTR ≥ 65% (14.8%) had a lower annual risk of ischemic stroke (3.04% per year) than did those with TTR < 65% (5.35% per year). Mean and median PINRR were 34.3% ± 17.1% and 34.2% (interquartile range, 22.7% and 46.0%), respectively. TTR significantly correlated with PINRR in a linear fashion (r = 0.81; P < 0.0001). A cutoff of PINRR ≤ 56.1% was a good discriminator of TTR < 65%, with a high sensitivity (98.3%) and positive predictive value (91.9%). The annual ischemic stroke risk in patients with PINRR > 56.1% was 2.56% per year, lower than those with TTR ≥ 65% (3.04% per year). Patients with PINRR > 56.1% had an annual incidence of intracranial hemorrhage comparable to those with TTR ≥ 65% (0.49% per year vs 0.68% per year). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with AF who are taking warfarin, the PINRR is a user-friendly alternative to TTR, having a high sensitivity and positive predictive value in predicting TTR. As with TTR, PINRR is associated with clinical adverse events, ie, ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage.
Authors: Ziv Harel; Eric McArthur; Nivethika Jeyakumar; Manish M Sood; Amit X Garg; Samuel A Silver; Paul Dorian; Daniel Blum; William Beaubien-Souligny; Andrew T Yan; Sunil V Badve; Brendan Smyth; Min Jun; Racquel Jandoc; Abhijat Kitchlu; Ron Wald Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 10.614
Authors: Mi Zhou; Esther W Chan; Jo Jo Hai; Chun Ka Wong; Yuk Ming Lau; Duo Huang; Cheung Chi Lam; Chor Cheung Frankie Tam; Yiu Tung Anthony Wong; See Yue Arthur Yung; Ki Wan Kelvin Chan; Yingqing Feng; Ning Tan; Ji-Yan Chen; Chi Yui Yung; Kwok Lun Lee; Chun Wai Choi; Ho Lam; Andrew Ng; Katherine Fan; Man Hong Jim; Kai Hang Yiu; Bryan P Yan; Chung Wah Siu Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Vanessa Roldán; Lorena Martínez-Montesinos; Raquel López-Gálvez; Lucía García-Tomás; Gregory Y H Lip; José Miguel Rivera-Caravaca; Francisco Marín Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-03-17