Oct
Issue
18 42
Novel anticoagulants associated with lower all-cause mortality compared to VKAs A new analysis of the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF Registry) shows that non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are superior to vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs) in reducing two-year mortality in higher risk patients, which the study defined as those with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. In a cohort of 19,134 patients, there were 19% fewer deaths in patients who received NOACs compared to VKAs at the time of atrial fibrillation diagnosis (adjusted HR: 0.81; 95% CI 0.71, 0.92; p<0.001).
T
he data were presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress (ESC; 25–29 August, Munich, Germany) by John Camm, (St George’s, University of London, London, UK). Commenting on the results, he said, “These real-world data may reflect the impact of poor VKA control, which was found to be associated with a high risk of events according to previous research.” The results also showed that there were 17% fewer deaths (adjusted HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.93; p<0.001) and 27% fewer strokes/systemic emboli (adjusted HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.90; p=0.003) with anticoagulants compared with no anticoagulant therapy in higher risk patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Camm said, “This new evidence of 26,742 GARFIELD-AF patients analysed over two years suggests that anticoagulant therapy has a beneficial effect beyond stroke prevention.” The GARFIELD-AF registry began enrolment in 2010 and ended in 2016, recruiting over 60,000 patients. Using data from the GARFIELD-AF registry, the aim of this study was to compare the baseline characteristics and comparative safety and effectiveness of treatment with or without anticoagulants, as well as NOACs and VKAs in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients from 35 countries who had been newly diagnosed with AF, with at least one factor for stroke, were enrolled between April 2013 (after NOAC therapy had become established in many countries)
and September 2016. Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 were included, while and only those with incomplete information or who had previously been treated with VKAs were excluded. This left a cohort of 26,742 patients eligible for analysis. Of these patients, 19,134 (71.6%) received oral anticoagulants, with 10,234 (53.5%) being treated with NOACs and 8,900 (28.4%) being treated with VKAs. No anticoagulant was given to 7,608 (28.4%) of patients. Sixty per cent of patients who did not receive anticoagulation therapy received antiplatelet therapy. Those receiving oral anticoagulants were more likely to be Caucasian (67.6%), while a higher proportion of Asian people received no anticoagulation (38.4%). There was a 17% relative risk reduction for all-cause mortality over two years for those who received oral anticoagulants compared to no anticoagulant (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.93). The risk of stroke/systemic embolism was also significantly increased in patients who were not receiving anticoagulation therapy (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59–0.90; p=0.003), however those receiving oral anticoagulants were more likely to suffer a major bleed (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.85; p=0.003). Overall, there was a significant risk reduction of all-cause mortality for patients receiving NOACs compared to VKAs, with a relative risk reduction of 19%. There was also a higher rate of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding in those receiving VKA therapy but this was not significant. Continued on page 2
New guidelines:
CV management during pregnancy
Page 4
Tim Betts:
Profile
Page 10
CABANA trial provides important new data on clinical and quality of life effects of ablation for atrial fibrillation Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) produced no significant improvement in death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest but did reduce death or cardiovascular hospitalization and recurrent AF in the Catheter Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy (CABANA) trial, the largest randomised controlled trial of AF ablation in the morethan-two-decade long history of the procedure. The primary clinical results were presented at the Heart Rhythm Society’s Scientific Sessions (HRS; 9–12 May, Boston, USA) by principal investigator Douglas L Packer (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA).
T
he goal of the trial was to compare the safety and efficacy of catheter ablation compared with drug therapy for the treatment of patients with new-onset or untreated symptomatic AF. CABANA randomised 2,204 patients with newonset or undertreated AF to catheter ablation (with a primary approach of pulmonary vein isolation) or drug therapy that included either rate or rhythm control (87.2% received rhythm control). Anticoagulation was used in both groups. In the trial patients were randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either catheter ablation (n=1,108) or drug therapy (n=1,096) and were followed for a median of 48.5 months. The mean patient age was 67.5 years and 37% of those enrolled were female. A significant proportion of the cohort suffered from co-morbidities: 9% had cardiomyopathy; 15% had chronic heart failure; 10% had prior cerebrovascular accidents or transient ischaemic attacks; 43% had paroxysmal AF; 57% had persistent or long-standing persistent AF and 39% had experienced a prior hospitalisation for AF. The primary endpoint of the trial (the composite of all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, Continued on page 2