Yin-Jun Mao1, Hang Wang1, Pin-Fang Huang2. 1. Department of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Chazhong Road No. 20, Fuzhou, Fujian, China. 2. Department of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Chazhong Road No. 20, Fuzhou, Fujian, China. abstract2016@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The ideal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy for patients being treated with a novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of using a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy versus an uninterrupted NOAC or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) strategy during AF ablation. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled or prospective observational studies that compared a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy with an uninterrupted NOAC or VKA strategy from the time of database establishment up to December 2019. The primary endpoints were major bleeding, minor bleeding, and symptomatic thromboembolism. The secondary endpoint was silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by post-ablation brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A measurement of treatment effect for the endpoint was reported as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 18 studies (6 randomized, 11 observational, and 1 randomized registry) with 6203 patients were included in the final analysis (47% of the patients received minimally interrupted NOAC). There was no significant difference between treatment groups regarding the risk for major bleeding (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69-1.57, P = 0.86, I2 = 27%). Different stratification methods did not yield significant difference regarding the risk for major bleeding. There was no difference between groups regarding the risk for minor bleeding (P = 1.00) or symptomatic thromboembolism (P = 0.26). Brain MRI results showed that both uninterrupted NOAC (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.83, P = 0.01, I2 = 72%) and uninterrupted VKA (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97, P = 0.04, I2 = 36%) produced a significant reduction in the rate of SCI when compared with minimally interrupted NOAC. CONCLUSIONS: A periprocedural anticoagulation strategy of minimally interrupted NOAC is not superior to uninterrupted NOAC or VKA when used during AF ablation. There is evidence favoring the use of uninterrupted NOAC or VKA in terms of the risk for SCI.
PURPOSE: The ideal periprocedural anticoagulation strategy for patients being treated with a novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) during catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is unclear. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of using a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy versus an uninterrupted NOAC or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) strategy during AF ablation. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized controlled or prospective observational studies that compared a minimally interrupted NOAC strategy with an uninterrupted NOAC or VKA strategy from the time of database establishment up to December 2019. The primary endpoints were major bleeding, minor bleeding, and symptomatic thromboembolism. The secondary endpoint was silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by post-ablation brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A measurement of treatment effect for the endpoint was reported as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 18 studies (6 randomized, 11 observational, and 1 randomized registry) with 6203 patients were included in the final analysis (47% of the patients received minimally interrupted NOAC). There was no significant difference between treatment groups regarding the risk for major bleeding (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69-1.57, P = 0.86, I2 = 27%). Different stratification methods did not yield significant difference regarding the risk for major bleeding. There was no difference between groups regarding the risk for minor bleeding (P = 1.00) or symptomatic thromboembolism (P = 0.26). Brain MRI results showed that both uninterrupted NOAC (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.83, P = 0.01, I2 = 72%) and uninterrupted VKA (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97, P = 0.04, I2 = 36%) produced a significant reduction in the rate of SCI when compared with minimally interrupted NOAC. CONCLUSIONS: A periprocedural anticoagulation strategy of minimally interrupted NOAC is not superior to uninterrupted NOAC or VKA when used during AF ablation. There is evidence favoring the use of uninterrupted NOAC or VKA in terms of the risk for SCI.
Authors: Thomas Deneke; Karin Nentwich; Joachim Krug; Patrick Müller; Peter Hubert Grewe; Andreas Mügge; Anja Schade Journal: J Atr Fibrillation Date: 2014-02-28
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: Stijn P G van Vugt; Sjoerd W Westra; Rick H J A Volleberg; Gerjon Hannink; Rena Nakamura; Carlo de Asmundis; Gian-Battista Chierchia; Eliano P Navarese; Marc A Brouwer Journal: Europace Date: 2021-12-07 Impact factor: 5.214