Matthew A Pappas1,2, Geoffrey D Barnes3, Sandeep Vijan4,5. 1. Center for Value-Based Care Research, Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, M2 Annex, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. pappasm@umich.edu. 2. Department of Hospital Medicine, Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. pappasm@umich.edu. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Frankel Cardiovascular Center, The University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Center for Value-Based Care Research, Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, M2 Annex, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 5. Department of Hospital Medicine, Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bridging anticoagulation is commonly prescribed to patients with atrial fibrillation who are initiating warfarin or require interruption of anticoagulation. Current guidelines recommend bridging for patients at high risk of stroke. Among patients with atrial fibrillation and one or more risk factors for ischemic stroke, the recently published BRIDGE trial found forgoing bridging during interruption to be, on average, noninferior to bridging with respect to ischemic complications, with significantly fewer hemorrhagic complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation across the spectrum of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke risk and thereby enable more nuanced, risk-stratified decision-making when bridging is considered during initiation or interruption of vitamin K antagonists. DESIGN: A Monte Carlo simulation, using a combination of literature-derived estimates, registry data, and trial data. MAIN MEASURES: Net clinical benefit, weighting for ischemic strokes, intracranial hemorrhages, and extracranial major hemorrhages. KEY RESULTS: The benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation vary according to underlying patient risk profiles for both thromboembolic stroke and major intracranial bleeding. Patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of hemorrhage derive benefit from bridging during initiation or interruption of warfarin therapy. Patients at similarly high or low risk of both outcomes may receive benefit from bridging during initiation and bridging during interruption, but this was sensitive to underlying assumptions. The need for stratification along both axes of risk was robust to a wide range of parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Bridging anticoagulation may provide benefit to patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of intracranial hemorrhage who are initiating or interrupting warfarin therapy, while patients at high or low risk of both complications may be harmed. The use of bridging anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation should be considered only after stratification by risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications.
BACKGROUND: Bridging anticoagulation is commonly prescribed to patients with atrial fibrillation who are initiating warfarin or require interruption of anticoagulation. Current guidelines recommend bridging for patients at high risk of stroke. Among patients with atrial fibrillation and one or more risk factors for ischemic stroke, the recently published BRIDGE trial found forgoing bridging during interruption to be, on average, noninferior to bridging with respect to ischemic complications, with significantly fewer hemorrhagic complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation across the spectrum of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke risk and thereby enable more nuanced, risk-stratified decision-making when bridging is considered during initiation or interruption of vitamin K antagonists. DESIGN: A Monte Carlo simulation, using a combination of literature-derived estimates, registry data, and trial data. MAIN MEASURES: Net clinical benefit, weighting for ischemic strokes, intracranial hemorrhages, and extracranial major hemorrhages. KEY RESULTS: The benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation vary according to underlying patient risk profiles for both thromboembolic stroke and major intracranial bleeding. Patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of hemorrhage derive benefit from bridging during initiation or interruption of warfarin therapy. Patients at similarly high or low risk of both outcomes may receive benefit from bridging during initiation and bridging during interruption, but this was sensitive to underlying assumptions. The need for stratification along both axes of risk was robust to a wide range of parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Bridging anticoagulation may provide benefit to patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of intracranial hemorrhage who are initiating or interrupting warfarin therapy, while patients at high or low risk of both complications may be harmed. The use of bridging anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation should be considered only after stratification by risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications.
Entities:
Keywords:
Monte Carlo Method; anticoagulants; atrial fibrillation; models; statistical; thromboembolism
Authors: Margaret C Fang; Alan S Go; Yuchiao Chang; Leila H Borowsky; Niela K Pomernacki; Natalia Udaltsova; Daniel E Singer Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-07-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jean-Yves Le Heuzey; Bettina Ammentorp; Harald Darius; Raffaele De Caterina; Richard John Schilling; Josef Schmitt; José Luis Zamorano; Paulus Kirchhof Journal: Thromb Haemost Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 5.249
Authors: Craig T January; L Samuel Wann; Joseph S Alpert; Hugh Calkins; Joaquin E Cigarroa; Joseph C Cleveland; Jamie B Conti; Patrick T Ellinor; Michael D Ezekowitz; Michael E Field; Katherine T Murray; Ralph L Sacco; William G Stevenson; Patrick J Tchou; Cynthia M Tracy; Clyde W Yancy Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 24.094
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: Stephen E Kimmel; Benjamin French; Scott E Kasner; Julie A Johnson; Jeffrey L Anderson; Brian F Gage; Yves D Rosenberg; Charles S Eby; Rosemary A Madigan; Robert B McBane; Sherif Z Abdel-Rahman; Scott M Stevens; Steven Yale; Emile R Mohler; Margaret C Fang; Vinay Shah; Richard B Horenstein; Nita A Limdi; James A S Muldowney; Jaspal Gujral; Patrice Delafontaine; Robert J Desnick; Thomas L Ortel; Henny H Billett; Robert C Pendleton; Nancy L Geller; Jonathan L Halperin; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Michael D Caldwell; Robert M Califf; Jonas H Ellenberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-11-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James D Douketis; Alex C Spyropoulos; Scott Kaatz; Richard C Becker; Joseph A Caprini; Andrew S Dunn; David A Garcia; Alan Jacobson; Amir K Jaffer; David F Kong; Sam Schulman; Alexander G G Turpie; Vic Hasselblad; Thomas L Ortel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-06-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Deborah Siegal; Jovana Yudin; Scott Kaatz; James D Douketis; Wendy Lim; Alex C Spyropoulos Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Maura Marcucci; Gregory Y H Lip; Robby Nieuwlaat; Ron Pisters; Harry J G M Crijns; Alfonso Iorio Journal: Am J Med Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Daniel E Singer; Yuchiao Chang; Leila H Borowsky; Margaret C Fang; Niela K Pomernacki; Natalia Udaltsova; Kristi Reynolds; Alan S Go Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2013-06-21 Impact factor: 5.501