Prevalence of atrial fibrillation and reasons for undertreatment with oral anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), the proportion of AF patients not receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) and reasons for abstaining from OAC treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study of patients aged 18 years or older with an AF diagnosis on June 1st 2020 in Västernorrland County, Sweden. AF diagnosis was retrieved using the ICD10 code I.48, and medical records were reviewed for comorbidities and documented reasons to abstain OAC treatment. RESULTS: Of 197 274 residents in Västernorrland County, 4.7% (9 304/197 274) had a documented AF diagnosis. Of these, 19% (1 768/9 304) had no OAC treatment, including 4.2% (393/9 304) with no indication, 2.5% (233/9 304) with a questionable and 2.5% (231/9 304) with a documented clear contraindication for OAC. In total 9.8% (911/9 304) were not treated with OAC despite indication and no reasonable documented contraindication, thus 90.8% (8 447/9 304) of all AF-patients were eligible for OAC treatment. Common reasons for abstaining treatment without reasonable contraindication were present sinus rhythm in 13.7% (125/911), perceived not an OAC candidate in 10.6% (97/911) and anemia in the past in 4.3% (39/911). CONCLUSIONS: In the population of Västernorrland County, a very high AF prevalence of 4.7% was found, of which just over 90% would theoretically benefit from OAC treatment. This is higher than previously reported and stresses the importance of stroke prevention in this large patient group.

Multicentre, national, investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel-group, register-based superiority trial to compare extended ECG monitoring versus standard ECG monitoring in elderly patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack and the effect on stroke, death and intracerebral bleeding: the AF SPICE protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major risk factor for ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and AF detection can be challenged by asymptomatic and paroxysmal presentation. Long-term ECG monitoring after ischaemic stroke or TIA is recommended by all major societies in cardiology and cerebrovascular medicine as a secondary prophylactic measure. However, data on stroke reduction are lacking, and the recommendations show significant diversity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: AF SPICE is a multicentre, national, investigator-initiated, randomised, parallel-group, register-based trial comparing extended ECG monitoring versus standard ECG monitoring in patients admitted with ischaemic stroke or TIA, with a composite endpoint of stroke, all-cause-mortality and intracerebral bleeding. Patients aged ≥70 years without previous AF will be randomised 1:1 to control (standard ECG monitoring) or intervention (extended ECG monitoring). In the control arm, patients will undergo 48±24 hours (ie, a range of 24-72 hours) of continuous ECG monitoring according to national recommendations. In the intervention arm, patients will undergo 14+14 days of continuous ECG monitoring 3 months apart using an ECG patch device, which will provide an easy-accessed, well-tolerated 14-day continuous ECG recording. All ECG patch recordings will be read in a core facility. In cases of AF detection, oral anticoagulation will be recommended if not contraindicated. A pilot phase has been concluded in 2022, which will transcend into the main trial during 2023-2026, including approximately 30 stroke units. The sample size was calculated to be 3262 patients. The primary outcome will be collected from register data during a 36-month follow-up. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been provided by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority, reference 2021-02770. The trial will be conducted according to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and national regulatory standards. Positive results from the study have the potential for rapid dissemination in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05134454.

Age at Menopause and the Risk of Stroke: Observational and Mendelian Randomization Analysis in 204 244 Postmenopausal Women.

Background Observational studies have shown that women with an early menopause are at higher risk of stroke compared with women with a later menopause. However, associations with stroke subtypes are inconsistent, and the causality is unclear. Methods and Results We analyzed data of the UK Biobank and EPIC-CVD (European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition-Cardiovascular Diseases) study. A total of 204 244 postmenopausal women without a history of stroke at baseline were included (7883 from EPIC-CVD [5292 from the subcohort], 196 361 from the UK Biobank). Pooled mean baseline age was 58.9 years (SD, 5.8), and pooled mean age at menopause was 47.8 years (SD, 6.2). Over a median follow-up of 12.6 years (interquartile range, 11.8-13.3), 6770 women experienced a stroke (5155 ischemic strokes, 1615 hemorrhagic strokes, 976 intracerebral hemorrhages, and 639 subarachnoid hemorrhages). In multivariable adjusted observational Cox regression analyses, the pooled hazard ratios per 5 years younger age at menopause were 1.09 (95% CI, 1.07-1.12) for stroke, 1.09 (95% CI, 1.06-1.13) for ischemic stroke, 1.10 (95% CI, 1.04-1.16) for hemorrhagic stroke, 1.14 (95% CI, 1.08-1.20) for intracerebral hemorrhage, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.84-1.20) for subarachnoid hemorrhage. When using 2-sample Mendelian randomization analysis, we found no statistically significant association between genetically proxied age at menopause and risk of any type of stroke. Conclusions In our study, earlier age at menopause was related to a higher risk of stroke. We found no statistically significant association between genetically proxied age at menopause and risk of stroke, suggesting no causal relationship.

Association Between History of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes and Coronary Artery Disease Assessed by Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography.

Importance: Adverse pregnancy outcomes are recognized risk enhancers for cardiovascular disease, but the prevalence of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis after these conditions is unknown. Objective: To assess associations between history of adverse pregnancy outcomes and coronary artery disease assessed by coronary computed tomography angiography screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study of a population-based cohort of women in Sweden (n = 10 528) with 1 or more deliveries in 1973 or later, ascertained via the Swedish National Medical Birth Register, who subsequently participated in the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Bioimage Study at age 50 to 65 (median, 57.3) years in 2013-2018. Delivery data were prospectively collected. Exposures: Adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, preterm delivery, small-for-gestational-age infant, and gestational diabetes. The reference category included women with no history of these exposures. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coronary computed tomography angiography indexes, including any coronary atherosclerosis, significant stenosis, noncalcified plaque, segment involvement score of 4 or greater, and coronary artery calcium score greater than 100. Results: A median 29.6 (IQR, 25.0-34.9) years after first registered delivery, 18.9% of women had a history of adverse pregnancy outcomes, with specific pregnancy histories ranging from 1.4% (gestational diabetes) to 9.5% (preterm delivery). The prevalence of any coronary atherosclerosis in women with a history of any adverse pregnancy outcome was 32.1% (95% CI, 30.0%-34.2%), which was significantly higher (prevalence difference, 3.8% [95% CI, 1.6%-6.1%]; prevalence ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.06-1.22]) compared with reference women. History of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia were both significantly associated with higher and similar prevalence of all outcome indexes. For preeclampsia, the highest prevalence difference was observed for any coronary atherosclerosis (prevalence difference, 8.0% [95% CI, 3.7%-12.3%]; prevalence ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14-1.45]), and the highest prevalence ratio was observed for significant stenosis (prevalence difference, 3.1% [95% CI, 1.1%-5.1%]; prevalence ratio, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.65-3.67]). In adjusted models, odds ratios for preeclampsia ranged from 1.31 (95% CI, 1.07-1.61) for any coronary atherosclerosis to 2.21 (95% CI, 1.42-3.44) for significant stenosis. Similar associations were observed for history of preeclampsia or gestational hypertension among women with low predicted cardiovascular risk. Conclusions and Relevance: Among Swedish women undergoing coronary computed tomography angiography screening, there was a statistically significant association between history of adverse pregnancy outcomes and image-identified coronary artery disease, including among women estimated to be at low cardiovascular disease risk. Further research is needed to understand the clinical importance of these associations.

Impact of non-adherence to direct oral anticoagulants amongst Swedish patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: results from a real-world cost-utility analysis.

AIMS: A third of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients are non-adherent to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Estimates of the economic value of full adherence and the cost of two types of adherence improving interventions are important to healthcare planners and decision-makers. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis estimated the impact of non-adherence over a 20-year horizon, for a patient cohort with a mean age of 77 years, based on data from the Stockholm Healthcare database of NVAF patients with incident stroke between 2011 and 2018. Adherence was defined using a medication possession ratio (MPR) cut-off of 90%; primary outcomes were the number of ischemic strokes and associated incremental cost-utility ratio. RESULTS: Hypothetical comparisons between cohorts of 1,000 patients with varying non-adherence levels and full adherence (MPR >90%) predicted an additional number of strokes ranging from 117 (MPR = 81-90%) to 866 (MPR <60%), and years of life lost ranging from 177 (MPR = 81- 90%) to 1,318 (MPR < 60%; discounted at 3%). Chronic disease co-management intervention occurring during each DOAC prescription renewal and patient education intervention at DOAC initiation will be cost-saving to the health system if its cost is below SEK 143 and SEK 4,655, and cost-effective if below SEK 858 and SEK 28,665, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adherence improving interventions for NVAF patients on DOACs such as chronic disease co-management and patient education can be cost-saving and cost-effective, within a range of costs that appear reasonable to the Swedish healthcare system.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of chronic cardiac arrhythmia and a major risk factor for ischemic stroke (IS). The objective of this study was to compare the costs and health outcomes associated with adherence to direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy in Sweden. The study also aimed to demonstrate the potential benefits of developing interventions to improve DOAC adherence. DOAC therapy (DOACs; apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) has been approved in Europe for the prevention of stroke in adult patients with AF. It has been demonstrated to provide warfarin-similar reductions in stroke risk in NVAF patients, with reductions in mortality and intracranial hemorrhage. However, non-adherence to DOAC medication prevents patients and healthcare systems from fully benefiting from DOAC therapy, resulting in a lower benefit than those seen in randomized controlled trials. DOAC non-adherence is where AF patients deviate from the DOAC treatment regimen as prescribed by health providers. This study suggested that non-adherence to DOAC therapy has a substantial impact on ischemic stroke risk and significant additional healthcare system costs. Patient education and chronic disease co-management (two types of DOAC adherence improving intervention) can be cost-saving and cost-effective within a range of costs that appear reasonable to the Swedish healthcare system. Healthcare policy-makers should prioritize initiatives aimed at improving DOAC adherence in order to improve outcomes in AF.

Prevalence and treatment of diabetes and pre-diabetes in a real-world heart failure population: a single-centre cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate a real-world heart failure (HF) cohort regarding (1) prevalence of known diabetes mellitus (DM), undiagnosed DM and pre-diabetes, (2) if hf treatment differs depending on glycaemic status and (3) if treatment of DM differs depending on HF phenotype. METHODS: All patients who had received a diagnosis of HF at Umeå University Hospital between 2010 and 2019 were identified and data were extracted from patient files according to a prespecified protocol containing parameters for clinical characteristics, including echocardiogram results, comorbidities, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values. Patients' HF phenotype was determined using the latest available echocardiogram. The number of patients with previous DM diagnosis was assessed. Patients without a previous diagnosis of DM were classified as non-DM, pre-diabetes or probable DM according to FPG and HbA1c levels using WHO criteria. RESULTS: In total, 2326 patients (59% male, mean age 76±13 years) with HF and at least one echocardiogram were assessed. Of these, 617 (27%) patients had a previous diagnosis of DM. Of the 1709 patients without a previous diagnosis of DM, 1092 (67%) patients had either an FPG or HbA1c recorded, of which 441 (41%) met criteria for pre-diabetes and 97 (9%) met criteria for probable diabetes, corresponding to 19% and 4% of the entire cohort, respectively. Patients with HF and diabetes were more often treated with diuretics and beta blockers compared with non-DM patients (64% vs 42%, p<0.001 and 88% vs 83%, p<0.001, respectively). There was no difference in DM treatment between HF phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: DM and pre-diabetes are common in this HF population with 50% of patients having either known DM, probable DM or pre-diabetes. Patients with HF and DM are more often treated with common HF medications. HF phenotype did not affect choice of DM therapy.

Eligibility of Dapagliflozin and Empagliflozin in a Real-World Heart Failure Population.

AIMS: This study is aimed at investigating the eligibility in a real-world heart failure population for the DAPA-HF (testing dapagliflozin) and EMPEROR-reduced (testing empagliflozin) trials, comparing the eligible real-world patients to trial participants and to characterize the noneligible patients. METHODS: Medical records of all heart failure patients who had a diagnosis of heart failure from the Heart Centre or Department of Internal Medicine at Umeå University Hospital were reviewed. RESULTS: 2433 of the hospital's uptake population of 150 000 had a diagnosis of heart failure. 681 patients had left ventricle ejection fraction ≤ 40%, and of these 352 (52%) and 268 (39%) patients met eligibility criteria for DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-reduced, respectively. Comparing eligible patients in our population with the DAPA-HF- and EMPEROR-reduced trial populations, we found that eligible real-world patients were older (79.0 vs. 66.2 years and 80.3 vs. 67.2 years, respectively), had worse renal function (eGFR 54.4 vs. 66.0 ml/min/1.73m2 and 49.5 vs. 61.8 ml/min/1.73m2, respectively), higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (56.0% vs. 36.1% and 53.0% vs. 35.6%, respectively), and lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus (21.0% vs. 41.8% and 26.1% vs. 49.8%, respectively). The main reasons for ineligibility were low NT-proBNP or low eGFR. Noneligible patients differed according to reason for ineligibility, where patients with low NT-proBNP were generally younger and healthier, and patients with low eGFR were older and had more comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: 39-52% of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in this real-world heart failure population were eligible for SGLT2-inhibitor treatment, corresponding to 11-14% of all heart failure patients. Compared to trial participants, eligible real-world patients were significantly older with worse renal function, more atrial fibrillation, and less diabetes mellitus. Trial entry criteria exclude comparatively young and healthy patients, as well as comparatively old patients with more comorbid conditions.

Dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban vs. high TTR warfarin in atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: New oral anticoagulants are non-inferior compared with warfarin regarding stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, with similar or decreased risk of bleeding. However, it is unclear whether high TTR warfarin is as effective and safe as NOACs. Our objective was to investigate efficacy and safety of apixaban, dabigatran or rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nationwide retrospective cohort study based on Swedish quality registries. Atrial fibrillation patients initiated on apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or warfarin between 2013-01-01 and 2015-12-31 were included. Main outcome measures were all-cause stroke and systemic embolism, all-cause stroke, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke; major bleeding, intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, other bleeding (fatal or requiring hospital care); all-cause mortality; myocardial infarction. RESULTS: The study included 64,382 patients corresponding to 81,176 treatment years. Of these, 37,174 patients were instituted on warfarin, 6574 on dabigatran, 8323 on rivaroxaban and 12,311 on apixaban. In warfarin treated patients, the time in therapeutic range was 71.4%. After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in risk of stroke or systemic embolism between NOAC and warfarin treated patients. Hazard ratios for major bleeding events were 0.63(95%CI 0.52-0.75) for apixaban, 0.74(0.62-0.87) for dabigatran and 1.06(0.92-1.23) for rivaroxaban, compared with warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no difference between apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban compared to high TTR warfarin treatment regarding stroke prevention. However, fewer bleeding events were seen for apixaban and dabigatran, but not for rivaroxaban. Further studies are needed on the comparability of individual NOACs with respect to bleeding risks.

Assessment of Use vs Discontinuation of Oral Anticoagulation After Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) is a recommended treatment for patients with atrial fibrillation, but it is unclear whether it results in a lower risk of stroke. Objectives: To investigate the proportion of patients discontinuing anticoagulation treatment after PVI in association with the CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years [doubled], diabetes, stroke [doubled], vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category [female]) score, identify factors predicting stroke after PVI, and explore the risk of cardiovascular events after PVI in patients with and without guideline-recommended anticoagulation treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Swedish national health registries from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2012, with a mean-follow up of 2.6 years. A total of 1585 patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PVI from the Swedish Catheter Ablation Register were included, with information about exposure to warfarin in the national quality register Auricula. Data analysis was performed from January 1, 2015, to April 30, 2016. Exposures: Warfarin treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and death. Results: In this cohort of 1585 patients, 73.0% were male, the mean (SD) age was 59.0 (9.4) years, and the mean (SD) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 1.5 (1.4). Of the 1585 patients, 1175 were followed up for more than 1 year after PVI. Of these, 360 (30.6%) discontinued warfarin treatment during the first year. In patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or more, patients discontinuing warfarin treatment had a higher rate of ischemic stroke (5 events in 312 years at risk [1.6% per year]) compared with those continuing warfarin treatment (4 events in 1192 years at risk [0.3% per year]) (P = .046). Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or more or those who had previously experienced an ischemic stroke displayed a higher risk of stroke if warfarin treatment was discontinued (hazard ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-17.2; P = .02 and hazard ratio, 13.7; 95% CI, 2.0-91.9; P = .007, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings indicate that discontinuation of warfarin treatment after PVI is not safe in high-risk patients, especially those who have previously experienced an ischemic stroke.

Atrial fibrillation patients with CHA2DS2-VASc >1 benefit from oral anticoagulation prior to cardioversion.

BACKGROUND: Electrical cardioversion of atrial fibrillation is associated with an increased risk of embolic stroke, but is generally considered safe if performed within 48h after onset. Our objective was to investigate if thromboembolism and bleeding in association with cardioversion of atrial fibrillation differed between patients with and without oral anticoagulation. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing electrical cardioversion from national Swedish health registries from January 1st 2006 until December 1st 2010. Main outcome measures were thromboembolism and bleeding. RESULTS: In total 22,874 atrial fibrillation patients underwent electrical cardioversion, 10,722 with and 12,152 without oral anticoagulation pre-treatment. Patients with low stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc 0-1) did not suffer from any thromboembolic complications within 30days after cardioversion. After adjustment for factors included in CHA2DS2-VASc and after propensity score matching, patients without oral anticoagulation had higher risk for thromboembolic complications, odds ratio 2.54 (95% confidence interval 1.70-3.79) and odds ratio 2.51 (95% confidence interval 1.69-3.75). There were no significant differences regarding bleeding complications between patients with or without anticoagulation after adjustment for factors included in HAS-BLED, odds ratio 1.08 (95% confidence interval 0.51-2.25), nor after propensity score matching, odds ratio 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.48-2.10). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that electrical cardioversion without prior anticoagulation may not be safe for patients with risk factors for thromboembolism (CHA2DS2-VASc score >1 point).

Los pacientes con fibrilación auricular no se benefician del ácido acetilsalicílico

Objetivo: la anticoagulación oral es el tratamiento recomendado para la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular en pacientes con fibrilación auricular. Sin embargo, muchos pacientes reciben ácido acetilsalicílico (AAS) como monoterapia. Nuestro objetivo fue investigar si los pacientes con fibrilación auricular se beneficiaban del AAS como monoterapia para la prevención de accidente cerebrovascular. Métodos y resultados: estudio retrospectivo de los pacientes con diagnóstico clínico de fibrilación auricular ingresados en el Registro Nacional Sueco de Pacientes entre el 1 de julio de 2005 y el 1 de enero de 2009, combinado con datos del Registro Nacional de Medicamentos Recetados. Las variables evaluables fueron accidente cerebrovascular isquémico, evento tromboembólico, hemorragia intracraneana, y sangrado mayor. La población en estudio consistió en 115.185 pacientes con fibrilación auricular, 58.671 de los cuales recibieron AAS como monoterapia y 56.514 no recibieron ningún tratamiento antitrombótico a nivel basal. La media de seguimiento fue de 1,5 años. El tratamiento con AAS se asoció a un mayor riesgo de presentar un accidente cerebrovascular isquémico y eventos tromboembólicos comparado con la ausencia de tratamiento antitrombótico. Conclusión: el AAS como monoterapia en la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular provocado por fibrilación auricular no posee ningún efecto discernible de protección contra el accidente cerebrovascular, y puede incluso aumentar el riesgo de accidente cerebrovascular isquémico en pacientes añosos. Por lo tanto, nuestros datos avalan las nuevas recomendaciones de las guías europeas, en el sentido que no debería utilizarse el AAS como monoterapia en la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular provocado por la fibrilación auricular.

Aims: Oral anticoagulation is the recommended treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Notwithstanding, many patients are treated with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) as monotherapy. Our objective was to investigate if atrial fibrillation patients benefit from ASA as monotherapy for stroke prevention. Methods and results: retrospective study of patients with a clinical diagnosis of atrial fibrillation between 1 July 2005 and 1 January 2009 in the National Swedish Patient register, matched with data from the National Prescribed Drugs register. Endpoints were ischaemic stroke, thrombo-embolic event, intracranial haemorrhage, and major bleeding. The study population consisted of 115 185 patients with atrial fibrillation, of whom 58 671 were treated with ASA as monotherapy and 56 514 were without any antithrombotic treatment at baseline. Mean follow-up was 1.5 years. Treatment with ASA was associated with higher risk of ischaemic stroke and thrombo-embolic events compared with no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusion: acetylsalicylic acid as monotherapy in stroke prevention of atrial fibrillation has no discernable protective effect against stroke, and may even increase the risk of ischaemic stroke in elderly patients. Thus, our data support the new European guidelines recommendation that ASA as monotherapy should not be used as stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation patients do not benefit from acetylsalicylic acid.

AIMS: Oral anticoagulation is the recommended treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Notwithstanding, many patients are treated with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) as monotherapy. Our objective was to investigate if atrial fibrillation patients benefit from ASA as monotherapy for stroke prevention. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective study of patients with a clinical diagnosis of atrial fibrillation between 1 July 2005 and 1 January 2009 in the National Swedish Patient register, matched with data from the National Prescribed Drugs register. Endpoints were ischaemic stroke, thrombo-embolic event, intracranial haemorrhage, and major bleeding. The study population consisted of 115 185 patients with atrial fibrillation, of whom 58 671 were treated with ASA as monotherapy and 56 514 were without any antithrombotic treatment at baseline. Mean follow-up was 1.5 years. Treatment with ASA was associated with higher risk of ischaemic stroke and thrombo-embolic events compared with no antithrombotic treatment. CONCLUSION: Acetylsalicylic acid as monotherapy in stroke prevention of atrial fibrillation has no discernable protective effect against stroke, and may even increase the risk of ischaemic stroke in elderly patients. Thus, our data support the new European guidelines recommendation that ASA as monotherapy should not be used as stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Computer aided warfarin dosing in the Swedish national quality registry AuriculA - Algorithmic suggestions are performing better than manually changed doses.

INTRODUCTION: Warfarin treatment with a high time in therapeutic range (TTR) is correlated to fewer complications. The TTR in Sweden is generally high but varies partly depending on local expertise and traditions. A dosing algorithm could minimize variations and increase treatment quality. Here we evaluate the performance of a computerized dosing algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 53.779 warfarin treated patients from 125 centers using the Swedish national quality registry AuriculA. If certain criteria are met, the algorithm gives one of seven possible dose suggestions, which can be unchanged, decreased or increased weekly dose by 5, 10 or 15%. The outcome evaluated by the resulting INR value was compared between dose suggestions arising from the algorithm that were accepted and those that were manually changed. There were no randomization, and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Both the algorithm-based and the manually changed doses had worse outcome if only two instead of three previous INR values were available. The algorithm suggestions were superior to manual dosing regarding percent samples within the target range 2-3 (hit-rate) or deviation from INR 2.5 (mean error). Of the seven possible outcomes from the algorithm, six were significantly superior and one equal to the manually changed doses when three previous INR:s were present. CONCLUSIONS: The algorithm-based dosing suggestions show better outcome in most cases. This can make dosing of warfarin easier and more efficient. There are however cases where manual dosing fares better. Here the algorithm will be improved to further enhance its dosing performance in the future.