Dynamic assessment of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores for predicting ischemic stroke and major bleeding in atrial fibrillation patients.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Stroke and bleeding risks in atrial fibrillation (AF) are often assessed at baseline to predict outcomes years later. We investigated whether dynamic changes in CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores over time modify risk prediction. METHODS: We included patients with AF who were stable while taking vitamin K antagonists. During a 6-year follow-up, all ischemic strokes/transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) and major bleeding events were recorded. CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED were recalculated every 2-years and tested for clinical outcomes at 2-year periods. RESULTS: We included 1361 patients (mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED 4.0±1.7 and 2.9±1.2). During the follow-up, 156 (11.5%) patients had an ischemic stroke/TIA and 269 (19.8%) had a major bleeding event. Compared with the baseline CHA2DS2-VASc, the CHA2DS2-VASc recalculated at 2 years had higher predictive ability for ischemic stroke/TIA during the period from 2 to 4 years. Integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) and net reclassification improvement (NRI) showed improvements in sensitivity and better reclassification. The CHA2DS2-VASc recalculated at 4 years had better predictive performance than the baseline CHA2DS2-VASc during the period from 4 to 6 years, with an improvement in IDI and an enhancement of the reclassification. The recalculated HAS-BLED at 2-years had higher predictive ability than the baseline score for major bleeding during the period from 2 to 4 years, with significant improvements in sensitivity and reclassification. A slight enhancement in sensitivity was observed with the HAS-BLED score recalculated at 4 years compared with the baseline score. CONCLUSIONS: In AF patients, stroke and bleeding risks are dynamic and change over time. The CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores should be regularly reassessed, particularly for accurate stroke risk prediction.

Assessment and Mitigation of Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: Executive Summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper.

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static "one-off" assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing "best practice" when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Assessment and mitigation of bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A Position Paper from the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society.

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static 'one off' assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing 'best practice' when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Assessment of two contact activation reagents for the diagnosis of congenital factor XI deficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Congenital FXI deficiency, a coagulopathy associated with low bleeding risk but thrombotic protection, is usually diagnosed by prolonged APTT and confirmed by coagulation assays. Recent evidences suggest that FXI deficiency might be underestimated. Sensitive and reliable methods to detect FXI deficiency are required. AIM: To examine the sensitivity of two methods and two contact activators on FXI deficiency screening. METHODS: 140 cases with FXI deficiency, 9 severe and 131 moderate, caused by 11different mutations were recruited. APTT and FXI:C were assessed in ACL-TOP 500coagulometer with silica-based (SynthASil) and ellagic acid-based (SynthAFax) reagents. F12 rs1801020 SNP was genotyped with Taqman probes. RESULTS: Severe FXI deficiency significantly prolonged APTT with both reagents. However, a high proportion of moderate deficiencies would not be detected using APTT, with false negatives of 22% for SynthASil and 12% for SynthAFax. False negatives results mainly corresponded to cases with qualitative deficiency (CRM+: p.Pro538Leu), which also had higher FXI coagulant activity. Using SynthASil, the common F12 rs1801020 variant, associated to low FXII levels, significantly prolonged APTT in moderate FXI deficiency subjects. FXI:C values were significantly higher with SynthAFax than with SynthASil (47.7±12.7 vs. 40.4±14.9), so SynthAFax rendered higher rate of false negatives than SynthASil (7% vs.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate FXI deficiency, particularly CRM+, might be underestimated using current diagnostic methods. The activator, FXI and FXII levels may contribute to a higher rate of false negatives using APTT. Our results suggests that the best screening method for FXI deficiency is FXI:C using silica.

The SAMe-TT2R2 Score Predicts Poor Anticoagulation Control in AF Patients: A Prospective 'Real-world' Inception Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: International guidelines recommend that an average individual time in therapeutic range should be >65% to 70% for optimal efficacy and safety outcomes while taking a vitamin K antagonist. The Sex, Age (<60 years); Medical history (at least 2 of the following: hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease/myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, congestive heart failure, previous stroke, pulmonary disease, hepatic or renal disease); Treatment (interacting drugs, eg, amiodarone for rhythm control) [all 1 point]; and the current Tobacco use (2 points) and Race (non-Caucasian; 2 points) (SAMe-TT2R2) score would help decision making by identifying those patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation who could do well on vitamin K antagonists. The study objective was to validate the predictive value of the SAMe-TT2R2 score for discriminating those who would achieve a high time in the therapeutic range (≥65%) in a prospective "real-world" cohort of patients with atrial fibrillation initiating oral anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists. METHODS: We studied an inception cohort of consecutive patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who initiated oral anticoagulation in our outpatient anticoagulation clinic. The baseline SAMe-TT2R2 score was calculated. At 6 months, we calculated the time in therapeutic range using a linear method. RESULTS: We included 459 patients, of whom 222 (47%) were male. Their median age was 76 years (interquartile range, 70-82 years), median Cardiac failure or dysfunction, Hypertension, Age over 75 years [Doubled], Diabetes, Stroke [Doubled] - Vascular disease, Age between 65-74 and Sex category [Female] (CHA2DS2-VASc) score was 4 (3-5), and median Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol Concomitantly (HAS-BLED) score was 3 (2-3). The median SAME-TT2R2 score was 2 (1-2). At 6 months, the mean ± standard deviation time in therapeutic range was 64% ± 17% overall, and 248 patients (54%) had a time in therapeutic range value >65%. Patients with a SAME-TT2R2 score 0 to 1 had a mean time in therapeutic range of 67% ± 18%, whereas patients with a SAME-TT2R2 score ≥2 had a mean time in therapeutic range of 61% ± 16% (P < .001). The odds ratio for having a low time in therapeutic range value was 2.10 (95% confidence interval, 1.44-3.06; P < .001) for those patients with a SAME-TT2R2 score ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective "real-world" inception cohort of patients with atrial fibrillation initiating oral anticoagulation with acenocoumarol, we have validated the clinical value of the SAME-TT2R2 score for the identification of patients who would have poor-quality anticoagulation. Thus, rather than imposing a "trial of vitamin K antagonists" for such patients (and exposing such patients to thromboembolic risks), we can a priori identify those patients who can (not cannot) do well on a vitamin K antagonists. Such patients would benefit from additional strategies for improving anticoagulation control with vitamin K antagonists or alternative oral anticoagulant drugs.

Conventional and new oral anticoagulants in the treatment of chest disease and its complications.

Oral anticoagulants block the coagulation cascade either by an indirect mechanism (e.g., vitamin K antagonists) or by a direct one (e.g., the novel oral anticoagulants). Vitamin K antagonists are widely used as treatment of venous thromboembolism and for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Although low molecular weight heparin remains the first line in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, more recently the novel oral anticoagulants such as dabigatran (initial dose of 110 mg within 1-4 h after surgery, followed by the full dose of 220 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (dose of 10 mg once daily, with the first dose administered 6-10 h after the surgery), and apixaban (dose of 2.5 mg twice daily, starting 12-24 h after surgery, but available only in Europe) are approved for prophylaxis in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. The period in which thromboembolic risk abates remains uncertain, and trials of extended therapy are still ongoing. After showing at least noninferiority to warfarin in RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE trials, dabigatran (110 or 150 mg twice daily), rivaroxaban (20 or 15 mg once daily), and apixaban (5 mg twice daily), respectively, were approved also for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. While awaiting long-term safety data, the choice among all these available therapies should be based on patient preferences, compliance, and ease of administration, as well as on local factors affecting cost-effectiveness.