Impact of adherence to warfarin therapy during 12 weeks of pharmaceutical care in patients with poor time in the therapeutic range.

Poor adherence to warfarin treatment is a contributor to poor quality of treatment, which increases the risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events. This study aims to evaluate the impact of adherence to warfarin therapy on anticoagulation quality during 12 weeks of pharmaceutical care and after 1 year of follow-up for patients with atrial fibrillation and with poor TTR. The Arrhythmia Unit of tertiary hospital in Brazil. We included 262 patients with AF and poor quality of anticoagulation therapy with warfarin (TTR < 50%). Pharmacist-driven therapy management was performed for 12 weeks and patients were also evaluated 1 year after the end of the follow-up with a pharmacist. Adherence was classified into high adherence, medium adherence and low adherence. Impact of adherence to warfarin therapy after pharmaceutical care. Of the 262 patients, 160 were high adherence, 71 were medium adherence and 31 were low adherence. No statistically significant difference is found between adherence groups in demographic and clinical variables. The TTR basal means were not different among adherence groups (p = 0.386). However, the means of TTR 12 weeks and TTR 1 year after the end of protocol were statistically different among adherence groups (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively). When we compared TTR values at different times within the adherence group, we observed that there is a statistical difference between the three TTR means (basal versus 12 weeks versus 1 year after) within the adherence group (p < 0.001). Patients with poor anticoagulation control, who adhered to the treatment with warfarin during the pharmaceutical care had better anticoagulation quality compared to those who did not adhere to the therapy with warfarin.

Evaluation of a pharmacogenetic-based warfarin dosing algorithm in patients with low time in therapeutic range - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a measurement of quality of warfarin therapy and lower TTR values (<50%) are associated with greater risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events. Recently, we developed a pharmacogenetic-based warfarin dosing algorithm specifically calibrated for a Brazilian patient sample. The aims of this study are: to evaluate the impact of a genetic-based algorithm, compared to traditional anticoagulation, in the time to achieve the therapeutic target and in TTR percentage; and to assess the cost-effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing in a specific cohort of patients with low TTR (<50%) from a tertiary cardiovascular hospital. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a randomized controlled trial in patients (n = 300) with atrial fibrillation with TTR < 50%, based on the last three INR values. At the first consultation, patients will be randomized into two groups: TA group (traditional anticoagulation) and PA group (pharmacogenetic anticoagulation). For the first group, the physician will adjust the dose according to current INR value and, for the second group, a pharmacogenetic algorithm will be used. At the second, third, fourth and fifth consultations (with an interval of 7 days each) INR will be measured and, if necessary, the dose will be adjusted based on guidelines. Afterwards, patients who are INR stable will begin measuring their INR in 30 day intervals; if the patient's INR is not stable, the patient will return in 7 days for a new measurement of the INR. Outcomes measures will include the time to achieve the therapeutic target and the percentage of TTR at 4 and 12 weeks. In addition, as a secondary end-point, pharmacoeconomic analysis will be carried out. Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee for Medical Research on Human Beings of the Clinical Hospital of the University of São Paulo Medical School. DISCUSSION: This randomized study will include patients with low TTR and it will evaluate whether a population-specific genetic algorithm might be more effective than traditional anticoagulation for a selected group of poorly anticoagulated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02592980 . Registered on 29 October 2015.

Comparison between cryotherapy and radiofrequency energy sources for parahisian accessory pathway percutaneous ablation.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation of parahisian accessory pathways (PHAP) are challenging due to their proximity to the normal conduction system. Retrospective studies suggest that cryoablation has a better safety profile but a higher recurrence rate when compared to radiofrequency ablation (RFCA). The objective of this study was to compare the results of parahisian AP ablation performed by electrophysiologists with experience in both technologies. METHODS: Prospective single-center, non-blinded and 1:1 model was used. Patients included had parahisian AP confirmed by an electrophysiological study and referred for radiofrequency or cryotherapy ablation according to current guidelines, under fluoroscopic guidance. No electroanatomic mapping was used. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients (mean age of 25±9.4 years; 90% male) were enrolled between Oct/2018 to Feb/2020. Acute success rate between RFCA and CRYO were similar (93% vs. 87%, p = 0.54). A nonsignificant reduction in short-term recurrence rate for RFCA (14% vs. 30%, p = 0.3) and mechanical trauma (6% vs. 20%; p = 0.28) was observed. Long-term recurrence rate and event-free survival time were similar in both groups after 1-year follow-up (p = 0.286). No persistent complete AV block or conduction disturbance was also observed. CONCLUSION: Considering the limitation of a small sample size and the lack of use of electroanatomic mapping for RFCA, the efficacy and safety profile of parahisian AP ablation with RFCA was not different from CRYO, when performed by experienced electrophysiologists. No cases of permanent complete AV block were reported with either energy modalities.

Evaluation of the Long-Term Impact on Quality After the End of Pharmacist-Driven Warfarin Therapy Management in Patients With Poor Quality of Anticoagulation Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is the most common oral anticoagulant drug, especially in low-income and emerging countries, because of the high cost of direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs), or when warfarin is the only proven therapy (mechanical prosthetic valve and kidney dysfunction). The quality of warfarin therapy is directly associated with dose management. Evidence shows that pharmaceutical care achieves a better quality of therapy with warfarin. However, there are no studies showing this intervention in a specific patient group with poor quality of anticoagulation in a long period after the end of the follow-up by a pharmacist. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether the quality of warfarin therapy driven by a pharmacist remains stable in the long term after the end of follow up with a pharmacist, in AF patients with poor quality of anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a prospective study, which evaluated about 2,620 patients and selected 262 patients with AF and poor quality of anticoagulation therapy with warfarin (TTR<50% - based on the last three values of international normalized ratio). Pharmacist-driven therapy management was performed up to 12 weeks. Data from patients were evaluated 1 year after the end of the follow-up with pharmacist. RESULTS: Comparison between mean TTR after 12 weeks of pharmaceutical care (54.1%) and mean TTR one year after the end of the pharmaceutical care (56.5%; p=0.081) did not achieve statistical difference, demonstrating that the increment of quality due to intervention of 12 weeks was maintained for 1 year after intervention. CONCLUSION: The long-term impact of pharmaceutical care was beneficial for patients with AF and poor quality of warfarin anticoagulation. This design might be an important strategy to treat a subgroup of patients without proven effectiveness of warfarin.

Is It Safe for Patients With Cardiac Channelopathies to Undergo Routine Dental Care? Experience From a Single-Center Study.

Background Brugada syndrome and long-QT syndrome may account for at least one third of unexplained sudden cardiac deaths. Dental care in patients with cardiac channelopathies is challenging because of the potential risk of life-threatening events. We hypothesized that the use of local dental anesthesia with lidocaine with and without epinephrine is safe and does not result in life-threatening arrhythmias in patients with channelopathies. Methods and Results We performed a randomized, double-blind pilot trial comparing the use of 2% lidocaine without a vasoconstrictor and with 1:100 000 epinephrine in 2 sessions of restorative dental treatment with a washout period of 7 days (crossover trial). Twenty-eight-hour Holter monitoring was performed, and 12-lead electrocardiography, digital sphygmomanometry, and anxiety scale assessments were also conducted at 3 time points. Fifty-six dental procedures were performed in 28 patients (18 women, 10 men) with cardiac channelopathies: 16 (57.1%) had long-QT syndrome, and 12 (42.9%) had Brugada syndrome; 11 (39.3%) of patients had an implantable defibrillator. The mean age was 45.9±15.9 years. The maximum heart rate increased after the use of epinephrine during the anesthesia period from 82.1 to 85.8 beats per minute (P=0.008). In patients with long-QT syndrome, the median corrected QT was higher, from 450.1 to 465.4 ms (P=0.009) at the end of anesthesia in patients in whom epinephrine was used. The other measurements showed no statistically significant differences. No life-threatening arrhythmias occurred during dental treatment. Conclusions The use of local dental anesthesia with lidocaine, regardless of the use of a vasoconstrictor, did not result in life-threatening arrhythmias and appears to be safe in stable patients with cardiac channelopathies. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03182777.

Pharmaceutical Care Increases Time in Therapeutic Range of Patients With Poor Quality of Anticoagulation With Warfarin.

Thromboembolic events are associated with high mortality and morbidity indexes. In this context, warfarin is the most widely prescribed oral anticoagulant agent for preventing and treating these events. This medication has a narrow therapeutic range and, consequently, patients usually have difficulty in achieving and maintaining stable target therapeutics. Some studies on the literature about oral anticoagulant management showed that pharmacists could improve the efficiency of anticoagulant therapy. However, the majority of these studies included general patients retrospectively. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate a pharmacist's warfarin management in patients with poor quality of anticoagulation therapy (Time in the Therapeutic Range- TTR < 50%). We included 268 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and without stable dose of warfarin (TTR < 50%, based on the last three values of International Normalized Ratio-INR). We followed them up for 12 weeks, INR values were evaluated and, when necessary, the dose adjustments were performed. During the first four visits, patient's INR was measured every 7 days. Then, if INR was within the target therapeutic range (INR: 2-3), the patient was asked to return in 30 days. However, if INR was out the therapeutic target, the patient was asked to return in 7 days. Adherence evaluation was measured through questionnaires and by counting the pills taken. Comparison between basal TTR (which was calculated based on the three last INR values before prospective phase) and TTR of 4 weeks (calculated by considering the INR tests from visits 0 to 4, in the prospective phase of the study) and basal TTR and TTR of 12 weeks (calculated based on the INR tests from visits 0 to 12, in the prospective phase of the study) revealed significant statistical differences (0.144 ± 0.010 vs. 0.382 ± 0.016; and 0.144 ± 0.010 vs. 0.543 ± 0.014, p < 0.001, respectively). We also observed that the mean TTR of 1 year before (retrospective phase) was lower than TTR value after 12 weeks of pharmacist-driven treatment (prospective phase) (0.320 ± 0.015; 0.540 ± 0.015, p < 0.001). In conclusion, pharmaceutical care was able to improve TTR values in patients with AF and poor quality of anticoagulation with warfarin.