Impacto de la anticoagulación en los pacientes con demencia y fibrilación auricular. Resultados del registro CardioCHUVI-FA / Impact of anticoagulation in patients with dementia and atrial fibrillation. Results of the CardioCHUVI-FA registry

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: El envejecimiento de la población se asocia con una prevalencia creciente de fibrilación auricular (FA) y demencia. Con este estudio se pretende analizar el impacto de la anticoagulación oral en pacientes ancianos con FA y demencia de grado moderado-grave. MÉTODOS: Estudio retrospectivo unicéntrico que analiza a pacientes de edad ≥ 85 años con diagnóstico de FA entre 2013 y 2018. El impacto de la anticoagulación en la mortalidad, las embolias y las hemorragias se evaluó mediante un análisis multivariado de Cox. En los pacientes con demencia, dicho análisis se complementó con un propensity score matching en función de que se les prescribiera tratamiento anticoagulante o no. RESULTADOS: De los 3.549 pacientes de 85 o más años con FA, 221 presentaban demencia de grado moderado-grave (6,1%), de los que 88 (60,2%) fueron anticoagulados. Durante un seguimiento de 2,8 ±1,7 años, la anticoagulación se asoció con menor riesgo embólico y mayor riesgo hemorrágico tanto en pacientes con demencia (HRembolias=0,36; IC95%, 0,15-0,84; HRhemorragias=2,44; IC95%, 1,04-5,71) como sin demencia (HRembolias=0,58; IC95%, 0,45-0,74; HRhemorragias=1,55; IC95%, 1,21-1,98). Sin embargo, la anticoagulación únicamente se asoció con menor mortalidad en los pacientes sin demencia (HR=0,63; IC95%, 0,53-0,75), no en pacientes con demencia (HR ajustada=1,04; IC95%, 0,63-1,72; p = 0,541; HR después de propensity score matching=0,91; IC95%, 0,45-1,83; p = 0,785). CONCLUSIONES: En pacientes de 85 o más años con demencia moderada-grave y FA, la anticoagulación oral se asoció de manera significativa con menor riesgo de embolias y mayor riesgo hemorrágico, sin encontrarse diferencias en cuanto a mortalidad total

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Population aging is associated with an increased prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and dementia. This study aimed to analyze the impact of oral anticoagulation in elderly patients with AF and moderate-severe dementia. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study analyzing patients aged ≥ 85 years with a diagnosis of AF between 2013 and 2018. The impact of anticoagulation on mortality, embolisms, and bleeding events was assessed by multivariate Cox analysis. In patients with dementia, this analysis was complemented by propensity score matching, depending on whether the patients were prescribed anticoagulant treatment or not. RESULTS: Of the 3549 patients aged ≥ 85 years with AF, 221 had moderate-severe dementia (6.1%), of whom 88 (60.2%) were anticoagulated. During a follow-up of 2.8 ±1.7 years, anticoagulation was associated with lower embolic risk and higher bleeding risk both in patients with dementia (hazard ratio [HR]embolisms, 0.36; 95%CI, 0,15-0.84; HRbleeding, 2.44; 95%CI, 1.04-5.71) and in those without dementia (HRembolisms, 5.58; 95%CI, 0.45-0.74; HRbleeding, 1.55, 95%CI, 1.21-1.98). However, anticoagulation was associated with lower mortality only in patients without dementia (HR, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.53-0.75) and not in those with dementia (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95%CI, 0.63-1.72; P=.541; HR after propensity score matching 0.91, 95%CI, 0.45-1.83; P=.785). CONCLUSIONS: In patients aged ≥ 85 years with moderate-severe dementia and AF, oral anticoagulation was significantly associated with a lower embolic risk and a higher bleeding risk, with no differences in total mortality

Características y resultados tras un año en pacientes ancianos ingresados con insuficiencia cardiaca y fracción de eyección reducida, intermedia o conservada / Characteristics and one-year outcomes in elderly patients hospitalised with heart failure and preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction

INTRODUCCIÓN: La última guía de insuficiencia cardiaca (IC) de la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología define 3 tipos de IC según la fracción de eyección (FE): FE reducida (ICFEr) cuando FE<40%, FE intermedia (ICFEi), cuando FE 40-49%, y FE conservada (ICFEc) cuando FE≥50%. El objetivo es analizar las características y resultados de los ancianos ingresados con IC según la nueva categorización por la FE. MÉTODOS: Estudio prospectivo con 531 pacientes diagnosticados de IC, categorizados según la FE, mayores de 75 años e ingresados en 6 servicios de Geriatría en España. Se analizan las características demográficas, clínicas y las comorbilidades, así como la morbimortalidad al año de seguimiento. RESULTADO: Un 17,1% de los pacientes se encuadraron en ICFEr, 10% en ICFEi y 72,9% en ICFEc. Aquellos con ICFEi eran similares a los de ICFEr en cuanto a la menor edad, predominio de hombres e ingreso previo por IC, así como en el uso de fármacos para el bloqueo neurohormonal. En los pacientes con ICFEr, respecto a aquellos con ICFEi e ICFEc, se objetivó mayor porcentaje de muertes (35,2, 24,5 y 25,1%), reingresos por IC (17,6, 15,1 y 14,2%) y eventos (59,3, 45,3 y 50,6%), aunque no hubo diferencias significativas. Tampoco se observaron diferencias en el análisis de supervivencia entre los grupos de FE y las variables de resultados tiempo-dependientes. CONCLUSIONES: En ancianos hospitalizados con IC, los categorizados como ICFEi no muestran claras diferencias en las características clínicas respecto a aquellos con ICFEr o ICFEc. No hubo diferencias en cuanto a la morbimortalidad

INTRODUCTION: The latest European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure (HF) guidelines define three types of HF according to the ejection fraction (EF): HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) when EF<40%, HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF), when EF 40-49%, and HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) when EF≥50%. The objective of this study was to analyse the characteristics and results of elderly patients hospitalised with HF according to the new classification using EF. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out with 531 HF patients aged ≥75 years classified according to EF, and admitted in the geriatric wards of 6 hospitals in Spain. An analysis was performed on the demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as well as the morbidity and mortality at one year of follow-up. RESULTS: As regards EF, 17.1% had HFrEF, 10% had HFmrEF, and 72.9% had HFpEF. Patients with HFmrEF were more similar to those with HFrEF in terms of a younger age, predominance of men, and previous admission due to HF. This was also the case with the use of drugs for neurohormonal blockade. Patients with HFrEF (compared to those with HFmrEF and HFpEF), had higher mortality (35.2%, 24.5%, and 25.6%, respectively), more readmissions for HF (17.6%, 15.1%, and 14.5%, respectively), and more events (61.5%, 45.3%, and 52.5%, respectively), although there were no significant differences. There were also no differences observed in the survival analysis between the EF groups and the time-dependent outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients hospitalised with HF, those classified as HFmrEF did not show any clear differences with respect to those with HFrEF or HFpEF. There were no differences in terms of morbidity and mortality

Geriatría transversal. Un reto asistencial para el siglo XXI / Cross-speciality geriatrics: A health-care challenge for the 21st century

Cada vez es mayor el número de pacientes de edad avanzada que está siendo tratado por especialidades diferentes a la geriatría, las cuales, por las características de sus tratamientos, necesitan conocer el pronóstico que tiene su indicación en los pacientes ancianos frágiles y optimizar la situación de estos pacientes para mejorar dicho pronóstico. Las más frecuentes, actualmente, son oncología y hematología, cardiología, cirugía general y otros servicios quirúrgicos. Se entiende por geriatría transversal la ampliación del área de conocimiento y atención de la geriatría en sentido horizontal, fuera de sus unidades habituales, aplicando los principios de la medicina geriátrica con un enfoque multidisciplinar al terreno de otros servicios que atienden a pacientes muy mayores y frágiles con enfermedades graves, con el objetivo de ofrecer una atención centrada en la persona y mejorar su manejo integral. La valoración geriátrica y la detección de la fragilidad en estos casos aportan información pronóstica y ayudan en la toma de decisiones y en la selección de un tratamiento individualizado. En algunos casos es posible mejorar la evolución de los pacientes y la eficiencia del sistema sanitario. En este artículo se revisan estos conceptos, se describen algunos modelos existentes, se mencionan los instrumentos más empleados para esta función y se resumen algunas actividades de esta nueva área de la asistencia geriátrica. Es previsible que cada vez en más hospitales se solicite a los servicios de geriatría la implementación de este tipo de valoraciones e intervenciones. Existe información básica para su puesta en marcha, pero no la suficiente como para considerar que están respondidas todas las preguntas que se plantean. Será, pues, en los próximos años un nuevo reto para esta especialidad

Increasing numbers of older persons are being treated by specialties other than Geriatric Medicine. Specialists turn to Geriatric Teams when they need to accurately stratify their patients' risk and prognosis, predict the potential impact of their, often, invasive interventions, optimise their clinical status, and contribute to discharge planning. Oncology and Haematology, Cardiology, General Surgery, and other surgical departments are examples where such collaborative working is already established, to a varying extent. The use of the term "Cross-speciality Geriatrics" is suggested when geriatric care is provided in clinical areas traditionally outside the reach of Geriatric Teams. The core principles of Geriatric Medicine (comprehensive geriatric assessment, patient-centred multidisciplinary targeted interventions, and input at point-of-care) are adapted to the specifics of each specialty and applied to frail older patients in order to deliver a holistic assessment/treatment, better patient/carer experience, and improved clinical outcomes. Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology and Frailty scoring in such patients provides invaluable prognostic information, helps in decision making, and enables personalised treatment strategies. There is evidence that such an approach improves the efficiency of health care systems and patient outcomes. This article includes a review of these concepts, describes existing models of care, presents the most commonly used clinical tools, and offers examples of excellence in this new era of geriatric care. In an ever ageing population it is likely that teams will be asked to provide Cross-specialty Geriatrics across different Health Care systems. The fundamentals for its implementation are in place, but further evidence is required to guide future development and consolidation, making it one of the most important challenges for Geriatrics in the coming years

[Characteristics and one-year outcomes in elderly patients hospitalised with heart failure and preserved, mid-range and reduced ejection fraction]. / Características y resultados tras un año en pacientes ancianos ingresados con insuficiencia cardiaca y fracción de eyección reducida, intermedia o conservada.

INTRODUCTION: The latest European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure (HF) guidelines define three types of HF according to the ejection fraction (EF): HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) when EF<40%, HF with mid-range EF (HFmrEF), when EF 40-49%, and HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) when EF≥50%. The objective of this study was to analyse the characteristics and results of elderly patients hospitalised with HF according to the new classification using EF. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out with 531 HF patients aged ≥75 years classified according to EF, and admitted in the geriatric wards of 6 hospitals in Spain. An analysis was performed on the demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as well as the morbidity and mortality at one year of follow-up. RESULTS: As regards EF, 17.1% had HFrEF, 10% had HFmrEF, and 72.9% had HFpEF. Patients with HFmrEF were more similar to those with HFrEF in terms of a younger age, predominance of men, and previous admission due to HF. This was also the case with the use of drugs for neurohormonal blockade. Patients with HFrEF (compared to those with HFmrEF and HFpEF), had higher mortality (35.2%, 24.5%, and 25.6%, respectively), more readmissions for HF (17.6%, 15.1%, and 14.5%, respectively), and more events (61.5%, 45.3%, and 52.5%, respectively), although there were no significant differences. There were also no differences observed in the survival analysis between the EF groups and the time-dependent outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients hospitalised with HF, those classified as HFmrEF did not show any clear differences with respect to those with HFrEF or HFpEF. There were no differences in terms of morbidity and mortality.

Impact of anticoagulation in patients with dementia and atrial fibrillation. Results of the CardioCHUVI-FA registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Population aging is associated with an increased prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and dementia. This study aimed to analyze the impact of oral anticoagulation in elderly patients with AF and moderate-severe dementia. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study analyzing patients aged ≥ 85 years with a diagnosis of AF between 2013 and 2018. The impact of anticoagulation on mortality, embolisms, and bleeding events was assessed by multivariate Cox analysis. In patients with dementia, this analysis was complemented by propensity score matching, depending on whether the patients were prescribed anticoagulant treatment or not. RESULTS: Of the 3549 patients aged ≥ 85 years with AF, 221 had moderate-severe dementia (6.1%), of whom 88 (60.2%) were anticoagulated. During a follow-up of 2.8 ±1.7 years, anticoagulation was associated with lower embolic risk and higher bleeding risk both in patients with dementia (hazard ratio [HR]embolisms, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.15-0.84; HRbleeding, 2.44; 95%CI, 1.04-5.71) and in those without dementia (HRembolisms, 0.58; 95%CI, 0.45-0.74; HRbleeding, 1.55, 95%CI, 1.21-1.98). However, anticoagulation was associated with lower mortality only in patients without dementia (HR, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.53-0.75) and not in those with dementia (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95%CI, 0.63-1.72; P=.541; HR after propensity score matching 0.91, 95%CI, 0.45-1.83; P=.785). CONCLUSIONS: In patients aged ≥ 85 years with moderate-severe dementia and AF, oral anticoagulation was significantly associated with a lower embolic risk and a higher bleeding risk, with no differences in total mortality.

[Cross-speciality geriatrics: A health-care challenge for the 21st century]. / Geriatría transversal. Un reto asistencial para el siglo xxi.

Increasing numbers of older persons are being treated by specialties other than Geriatric Medicine. Specialists turn to Geriatric Teams when they need to accurately stratify their patients' risk and prognosis, predict the potential impact of their, often, invasive interventions, optimise their clinical status, and contribute to discharge planning. Oncology and Haematology, Cardiology, General Surgery, and other surgical departments are examples where such collaborative working is already established, to a varying extent. The use of the term "Cross-speciality Geriatrics" is suggested when geriatric care is provided in clinical areas traditionally outside the reach of Geriatric Teams. The core principles of Geriatric Medicine (comprehensive geriatric assessment, patient-centred multidisciplinary targeted interventions, and input at point-of-care) are adapted to the specifics of each specialty and applied to frail older patients in order to deliver a holistic assessment/treatment, better patient/carer experience, and improved clinical outcomes. Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology and Frailty scoring in such patients provides invaluable prognostic information, helps in decision making, and enables personalised treatment strategies. There is evidence that such an approach improves the efficiency of health care systems and patient outcomes. This article includes a review of these concepts, describes existing models of care, presents the most commonly used clinical tools, and offers examples of excellence in this new era of geriatric care. In an ever ageing population it is likely that teams will be asked to provide Cross-specialty Geriatrics across different Health Care systems. The fundamentals for its implementation are in place, but further evidence is required to guide future development and consolidation, making it one of the most important challenges for Geriatrics in the coming years.

Vitamin K Antagonists and Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Nonagenarian Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: Nonagenarian patients are underrepresented in clinical trials that have evaluated oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of this study was to assess the pronostic impact of oral anticoagulation in patients with AF age ≥90 years. DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter study of nonagenarian patients with AF. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1750 nonagenarian inpatients and outpatients with nonvalvular AF between January 2013 and December 2018 in 3 Spanish health areas were studied. METHODS: Patients were divided into 3 groups based on antithrombotic therapy: nonoral anticoagulants (30.5%), vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs; 28.6%), and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs; 40.9%). During a mean follow-up of 23.6 ± 6.6 months, efficacy outcomes (death and embolic events) were evaluated using a Cox regression analysis and safety outcomes (bleeding requiring hospitalization) by competing-risk regression. Results were complemented with a propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS: During follow-up, 988 patients died (56.5%), 180 had embolic events (10.3%), and 186 had major bleeding (10.6%). After multivariable adjustment, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of death and embolic events than nonanticoagulation [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI)] 0.61‒0.92), but VKAs were not (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72‒1.05). These results were confirmed after propensity score matching analysis. For bleeding, both DOACs and VKAs proved to be associated with a higher risk (HR for DOAC 1.43; 95% CI 0.97‒2.13; HR for VKA 1.94; 95% CI 1.31‒2.88), although findings for DOACs were not statistically significant (P = .074). For intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), only VKAs-not DOACs-presented a higher risk of ICH (HR 4.43; 95% CI 1.48‒13.31). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: In nonagenarian patients with AF, DOACs led to a reduction in mortality and embolic events in comparison with nonanticoagulation. This reduction was not observed with VKAs. Although both DOACs and VKAs increased the risk of bleeding, only VKAs were associated with higher ICH rates.

Frailty, disability and comorbidity: different domains lead to different effects after surgical aortic valve replacement in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty syndrome predicts adverse outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. However, disability or comorbidity is frequently associated with preoperative frailty evaluation. The effects of these domains on early and late outcomes were analysed. METHODS: A prospective study including patients aged ≥75 years with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who received aortic valve replacement with or without coronary artery bypass grafting was conducted. We used the Cardiovascular Health Study Frailty Phenotype to assess frailty, the Lawton-Brody index to define disability and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) to evaluate comorbidity. RESULTS: Frailty was identified in 57 (31%), dependence in 18 (9.9%) and advanced comorbidity (CCI ≥ 4) in 67 (36.6%) of the 183 enrolled patients. Operative mortality (1.6%), transfusion rate and duration of stay increased in patients with CCI ≥4 (P < 0.005). There was a non-significant trend for these adverse outcomes among the frail patients. Follow-up was achieved in all patients (median/interquartile range 869/699-1099 days). Kaplan-Meier univariable analysis showed a reduced survival rate for frail and dependent patients and for those with multiple comorbidities (P < 0.05). According to multivariable analysis, frailty and comorbidity were independent risk factors for 1-year mortality, while disability and comorbidity, but not frailty, were risk factors for 3-year mortality (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged ≥75 years is a safe procedure with low mortality rates. Operative outcomes are mainly affected by comorbidities. The main influence of survival occurs throughout the first year, and an improved functional status prevents any progression towards disabilities, which could potentially benefit long-term outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02745314.

Evolución de los pacientes con estenosis aórtica grave tras la indicación de intervención / Prognosis of patients with severe aortic stenosis after the decision to perform an intervention

Introducción y objetivos: Los tratamientos actuales de la estenosis aórtica (EAo) grave incluyen el implante percutáneo de válvula aórtica (TAVI) y la cirugía de sustitución valvular aórtica (SVAo). El objetivo es describir la evolución de los pacientes con EAo grave tras la indicación de intervención, las variables que influyen en su pronóstico y los determinantes de un tiempo de espera superior a 2 meses. Métodos: Subanálisis del registro IDEAS (Influencia del Diagnóstico de Estenosis Aórtica Severa) en los pacientes a los que se indicó intervención. Resultados: De 726 pacientes con EAo grave diagnosticada en enero de 2014, se indicó intervención a 300 que son el foco del presente estudio. La media de edad era 74,0 +/- 9,7 años. Se intervino a 258 pacientes (86,0%): 59 con TAVI y 199 con SVAo. Al año, 42 (14,0%) continuaban sin intervención, ya sea por seguir en espera (34) o haber fallecido (8). La mitad de los pacientes que murieron antes del procedimiento fallecieron en los primeros 100 días. El tiempo hasta la intervención fue 2,9 +/- 1,6 meses para el TAVI y 3,5 +/- 0,2 meses para la SVAo (p = 0,03). Los predictores de mortalidad independientes fueron el sexo masculino (HR = 2,6; IC95%, 1,1-6,0), la insuficiencia mitral moderada-grave (HR = 2,6; IC95%, 1,5-4,5), la movilidad reducida (HR = 4,6; IC95%, 1,7-12,6) y la falta de intervención (HR = 2,3; IC95%, 1,02-5,03). Conclusiones: Los pacientes con EAo grave en espera de intervención tienen alto riesgo de mortalidad. Hay indicadores clínicos asociados con peor pronóstico que podrían indicar la necesidad de una intervención precoz

Introduction and objectives: Current therapeutic options for severe aortic stenosis (AS) include transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Our aim was to describe the prognosis of patients with severe AS after the decision to perform an intervention, to study the variables influencing their prognosis, and to describe the determinants of waiting time > 2 months. Methods: Subanalysis of the IDEAS (Influence of the Severe Aortic Stenosis Diagnosis) registry in patients indicated for TAVI or SAVR. Results: Of 726 patients with severe AS diagnosed in January 2014, the decision to perform an intervention was made in 300, who were included in the present study. The mean age was 74.0 +/- 9.7 years. A total of 258 (86.0%) underwent an intervention: 59 TAVI and 199 SAVR. At the end of the year, 42 patients (14.0%) with an indication for an intervention did not receive it, either because they remained on the waiting list (34 patients) or died while waiting for the procedure (8 patients). Of the patients who died while on the waiting list, half did so in the first 100 days. The mean waiting time was 2.9 +/- 1.6 for TAVI and 3.5 +/- 0.2 months for SAVR (P = .03). The independent predictors of mortality were male sex (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.1-6.0), moderate-severe mitral regurgitation (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.5-4.5), reduced mobility (HR, 4.6; 95%CI, 1.7-12.6), and non intervention (HR, 2.3; 95%CI, 1.02-5.03). Conclusions: Patients with severe aortic stenosis a waiting therapeutic procedures have a high mortality risk. Some clinical indicators predict a worse prognosis and suggest the need for early intervention

Prognosis of Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis After the Decision to Perform an Intervention.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Current therapeutic options for severe aortic stenosis (AS) include transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Our aim was to describe the prognosis of patients with severe AS after the decision to perform an intervention, to study the variables influencing their prognosis, and to describe the determinants of waiting time > 2 months. METHODS: Subanalysis of the IDEAS (Influence of the Severe Aortic Stenosis Diagnosis) registry in patients indicated for TAVI or SAVR. RESULTS: Of 726 patients with severe AS diagnosed in January 2014, the decision to perform an intervention was made in 300, who were included in the present study. The mean age was 74.0 ± 9.7 years. A total of 258 (86.0%) underwent an intervention: 59 TAVI and 199 SAVR. At the end of the year, 42 patients (14.0%) with an indication for an intervention did not receive it, either because they remained on the waiting list (34 patients) or died while waiting for the procedure (8 patients). Of the patients who died while on the waiting list, half did so in the first 100 days. The mean waiting time was 2.9 ± 1.6 for TAVI and 3.5 ± 0.2 months for SAVR (P = .03). The independent predictors of mortality were male sex (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.1-6.0), moderate-severe mitral regurgitation (HR, 2.6; 95%CI, 1.5-4.5), reduced mobility (HR, 4.6; 95%CI, 1.7-12.6), and nonintervention (HR, 2.3; 95%CI, 1.02-5.03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis awaiting therapeutic procedures have a high mortality risk. Some clinical indicators predict a worse prognosis and suggest the need for early intervention.

Anticoagulantes orales en pacientes frágiles con fibrilación auricular: moviéndose en la incertidumbre en la práctica clínica diaria / Oral anticoagulants in frail patients with atrial fibrillation: moving in the uncertainty of daily clinical practice

No disponible

Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Vitamin K Antagonists in Oldest Old Patients: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in oldest old patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in daily clinical practice has not been systematically assessed. This study examined the safety of DOACs and dicumarol (a vitamin K antagonist) in NVAF geriatric patients. DESIGN: Prospective study from January 2010 through June 2015, with follow-up through January 2016. SETTING: Geriatric medicine department at a tertiary hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 554 outpatients, 75 years or older, diagnosed of NVAF and starting oral anticoagulation. MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome was bleeding, which was classified into major (including those life-threatening) and nonmajor episodes. Statistical analyses were performed with Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 351 patients received DOACs and 193 dicumarol. Patients on DOACs were older, with more frequent comorbidities, mobility limitation and disability in activities of daily living, as well as higher mortality, than those treated with dicumarol. The incidence of any bleeding was 19.2/100 person-years among patients on DOACs and 13.7/100 person-years on dicumarol; corresponding figures for major bleeding were 5.2 for those on DOACs, and 3.3 for those on dicumarol. In crude analyses, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for any bleeding, and for mayor bleeding in patients on DOACs vs dicumarol were 1.60 (1.04-2.44) and 2.22 (0.88-5.59), respectively. Excess risk of bleeding associated with DOACs vs dicumarol disappeared after adjustment for clinical characteristics, so that corresponding figures were 1.19 (0.68-2.08) and 1.01 (0.35-2.93). Results did not vary across subgroups of high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: In very old patients with NVAF, the higher risk of bleeding associated with DOACs vs dicumarol could be mostly explained by the worse clinical profile of patients receiving DOACs. Risk of bleeding was rather high, and warrants close clinical monitoring.

Alfabetización en salud y resultados de salud en pacientes muy ancianos con insuficiencia cardiaca / Health literacy and health outcomes in very old patients with heart failure

Introducción y objetivos: La alfabetización en salud (AS) se ha asociado con menor mortalidad en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca (IC) relativamente jóvenes y de alto nivel educativo en Estados Unidos. Este estudio evalúa la asociación de la AS con el conocimiento de la enfermedad, el autocuidado y la mortalidad por cualquier causa en pacientes muy ancianos con muy bajo nivel educativo. Métodos: Estudio prospectivo con 556 pacientes (media de edad, 85 años) con mucha comorbilidad admitidos por IC en las unidades geriátricas de 6 hospitales españoles. El 74% de los pacientes tenían estudios inferiores a los primarios y el 71%, función sistólica conservada. La AS se valoró con el cuestionario Short Assessment of Health Literacy for Spanish-speaking Adults; el conocimiento sobre la IC, con el cuestionario de DeWalt, y el autocuidado, con la European Heart Failure Self-Care Behaviour Scale. Resultados: El conocimiento sobre la IC aumenta con la AS; comparado con el tercil inferior de AS, el coeficiente beta multivariado (IC95%) de conocimiento sobre la IC fue 0,60 (0,01-1,19) en el segundo tercil y 0,87 (0,24-1,50) en el tercil superior (p de tendencia = 0,008). Sin embargo, la AS no se asoció con el autocuidado de la IC. En los 12 meses de seguimiento hubo 189 muertes. Comparado con el tercil inferior de AS, la HR multivariable (IC95%) de mortalidad fue 0,84 (0,56-1,27) en el segundo tercil y 0,99 (0,65-1,51) en el tercil superior (p de tendencia = 0,969). Conclusiones: No se observó asociación entre la AS y la mortalidad a los 12 meses. Esto puede explicarse en parte por la falta de asociación entre AS y autocuidado (AU)

Introduction and objectives: Health literacy (HL) has been associated with lower mortality in heart failure (HF). However, the results of previous studies may not be generalizable because the research was conducted in relatively young and highly-educated patients in United States settings. This study assessed the association of HL with disease knowledge, self-care, and all-cause mortality among very old patients, with a very low educational level. Methods: This prospective study was performed in 556 patients (mean age, 85 years), with high comorbidity, admitted for HF to the geriatric acute-care unit of 6 hospitals in Spain. About 74% of patients had less than primary education and 71% had preserved systolic function. Health literacy was assessed with the Short Assessment of Health Literacy for Spanish-speaking Adults questionnaire, knowledge of HF with the DeWalt questionnaire, and HF self-care with the European Heart Failure Self-Care Behaviour Scale. Results: Disease knowledge progressively increased with HL; compared with being in the lowest (worse) tertile of HL, the multivariable beta coefficient (95%CI) of the HF knowledge score was 0.60 (0.01-1.19) in the second tertile and 0.87 (0.24-1.50) in the highest tertile, P-trend = .008. However, no association was found between HL and HF self-care. During the 12 months of follow-up, there were 189 deaths. Compared with being in the lowest tertile of HL, the multivariable HR (95%CI) of mortality was 0.84 (0.56-1.27) in the second tertile and 0.99 (0.65-1.51) in the highest tertile, P-trend = .969. Conclusions: No association was found between HL and 12-month mortality. This could be partly due to the lack of a link between HL and self-care (AU)

Health Literacy and Health Outcomes in Very Old Patients With Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Health literacy (HL) has been associated with lower mortality in heart failure (HF). However, the results of previous studies may not be generalizable because the research was conducted in relatively young and highly-educated patients in United States settings. This study assessed the association of HL with disease knowledge, self-care, and all-cause mortality among very old patients, with a very low educational level. METHODS: This prospective study was performed in 556 patients (mean age, 85 years), with high comorbidity, admitted for HF to the geriatric acute-care unit of 6 hospitals in Spain. About 74% of patients had less than primary education and 71% had preserved systolic function. Health literacy was assessed with the Short Assessment of Health Literacy for Spanish-speaking Adults questionnaire, knowledge of HF with the DeWalt questionnaire, and HF self-care with the European Heart Failure Self-Care Behaviour Scale. RESULTS: Disease knowledge progressively increased with HL; compared with being in the lowest (worse) tertile of HL, the multivariable beta coefficient (95%CI) of the HF knowledge score was 0.60 (0.01-1.19) in the second tertile and 0.87 (0.24-1.50) in the highest tertile, P-trend = .008. However, no association was found between HL and HF self-care. During the 12 months of follow-up, there were 189 deaths. Compared with being in the lowest tertile of HL, the multivariable HR (95%CI) of mortality was 0.84 (0.56-1.27) in the second tertile and 0.99 (0.65-1.51) in the highest tertile, P-trend = .969. CONCLUSIONS: No association was found between HL and 12-month mortality. This could be partly due to the lack of a link between HL and self-care.

The frailty syndrome is associated with adverse health outcomes in very old patients with stable heart failure: A prospective study in six Spanish hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Most studies on the association between the frailty syndrome and adverse health outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) have used non-standard definitions of frailty. This study examined the association of frailty, diagnosed by well-accepted criteria, with mortality, readmission and functional decline in very old ambulatory patients with HF. METHODS: Prospective study with 497 patients in six Spanish hospitals and followed up during one year. Mean (SD) age was 85.2 (7.3) years, and 79.3% had LVEF >45%. Frailty was diagnosed as having ≥3 of the 5 Fried criteria. Readmission was defined as a new episode of hospitalisation lasting >24h, and functional decline as an incident limitation in any activity of daily living at the 1-year visit. Statistical analyses were performed with Cox and logistic regression, as appropriate, and adjusted for the main prognostic factors at baseline. RESULTS: At baseline, 57.5% of patients were frail. The adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for mortality among frail versus non-frail patients was 1.93 (1.20-3.27). Mortality was higher among patients with low physical activity [1.64 (1.10-2.45)] or exhaustion [1.83 (1.21-2.77)]. Frailty was linked to increased risk of readmission [1.66 (1.17-2.36)] and functional decline [odds ratio 1.67 (1.01-2.79)]. Slow gait speed was related to functional decline [odds ratio 3.59 (1.75-7.34)]. A higher number of frailty criteria was associated with a higher risk of the three study outcomes (P trend<0.01 in each outcome). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was associated with increased risk of 1-year mortality, hospital readmission and functional decline among older ambulatory patients with HF.

The frailty syndrome and mortality among very old patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis under different treatments.

BACKGROUND: The role of frailty as a prognostic factor in non-selected patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (SAS) is still uncertain. This study aims to examine the association between the frailty syndrome and mortality among very old patients with symptomatic SAS, and to assess whether the association varies with the type of SAS treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective study of 606 patients aged ≥75years with symptomatic SAS, recruited from February 2010 to January 2015, who were followed up through June 2015. At baseline, frailty was defined as having at least three of the following five criteria: muscle weakness, slow gait speed, low physical activity, exhaustion, and unintentional weight loss. Statistical analyses were performed with multivariate Cox regression. At baseline, 49.3% patients were frail. During a mean follow-up of 98weeks, 35.3% of patients died. The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of mortality among frail versus non-frail patients was 1.83 (1.33-2.51). The corresponding results were 1.58 (1.09-2.28) among patients under medical treatment, 3.06 (1.25-7.50) in those with transcatheter aortic valve replacement, and 1.97 (0.83-4.67) in those with surgical aortic valve replacement, p for interaction=0.21. When the frailty criteria were considered separately, mortality was also higher among patients with slow gait speed [1.52 (1.05-2.19)] or low physical activity [1.35 (1.00-1.85)]. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is associated with increased mortality among patients with symptomatic SAS, and this association does not vary with the type of SAS treatment. Future studies evaluating the benefits of different treatments in SAS patients should account for baseline frailty.

Comparison of 1-Year Outcome in Patients With Severe Aorta Stenosis Treated Conservatively or by Aortic Valve Replacement or by Percutaneous Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (Data from a Multicenter Spanish Registry).

The factors that influence decision making in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are unknown. Our aim was to assess, in patients with severe AS, the determinants of management and prognosis in a multicenter registry that enrolled all consecutive adults with severe AS during a 1-month period. One-year follow-up was obtained in all patients and included vital status and aortic valve intervention (aortic valve replacement [AVR] and transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI]). A total of 726 patients were included, mean age was 77.3 ± 10.6 years, and 377 were women (51.8%). The most common management was conservative therapy in 468 (64.5%) followed by AVR in 199 (27.4%) and TAVI in 59 (8.1%). The strongest association with aortic valve intervention was patient management in a tertiary hospital with cardiac surgery (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 4.1, p <0.001). The 2 main reasons to choose conservative management were the absence of significant symptoms (136% to 29.1%) and the presence of co-morbidity (128% to 27.4%). During 1-year follow-up, 132 patients died (18.2%). The main causes of death were heart failure (60% to 45.5%) and noncardiac diseases (46% to 34.9%). One-year survival for patients treated conservatively, with TAVI, and with AVR was 76.3%, 94.9%, and 92.5%, respectively, p <0.001. One-year survival of patients treated conservatively in the absence of significant symptoms was 97.1%. In conclusion, most patients with severe AS are treated conservatively. The outcome in asymptomatic patients managed conservatively was acceptable. Management in tertiary hospitals is associated with valve intervention. One-year survival was similar with both interventional strategies.