Jones M, McEwan P, Morgan C Ll, Peters J R, Goodfellow J, Currie C J
School of Mathematics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Heart. 2005 Apr;91(4):472-7. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2004.042465.
To evaluate how well patients with non-valvar atrial fibrillation (NVAF) were maintained within the recommended international normalised ratio (INR) target of 2.0-3.0 and to explore the relation between achieved INR control and clinical outcomes.
Record linkage study of routine activity records and INR measurements.
Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan, South Wales, UK.
2223 patients with NVAF, no history of heart valve replacement, and with at least five INR measurements.
Mortality, ischaemic stroke, all thromboembolic events, bleeding events, hospitalisation, and patterns of INR monitoring.
Patients treated with warfarin were outside the INR target range 32.1% of the time, with 15.4% INR values > 3.0 and 16.7% INR values < 2.0. However, the quartile with worst control spent 71.6% of their time out of target range compared with only 16.3% out of range in the best controlled quartile. The median period between INR tests was 16 days. Time spent outside the target range decreased as the duration of INR monitoring increased, from 52% in the first three months of monitoring to 30% after two years. A multivariate logistic regression model showed that a 10% increase in time out of range was associated with an increased risk of mortality (odds ratio (OR) 1.29, p < 0.001) and of an ischaemic stroke (OR 1.10, p = 0.006) and other thromboembolic events (OR 1.12, p < 0.001). The rate of hospitalisation was higher when INR was outside the target range.
Suboptimal anticoagulation was associated with poor clinical outcomes, even in a well controlled population. However, good control was difficult to achieve and maintain. New measures are needed to improve maintenance anticoagulation in patients with NVAF.
评估非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者维持在推荐的国际标准化比值(INR)目标范围2.0 - 3.0内的情况,并探讨所达到的INR控制与临床结局之间的关系。
对常规活动记录和INR测量值进行记录链接研究。
英国南威尔士的加的夫和格拉摩根谷。
2223例NVAF患者,无心脏瓣膜置换史,且至少有5次INR测量值。
死亡率、缺血性卒中、所有血栓栓塞事件、出血事件、住院情况以及INR监测模式。
接受华法林治疗的患者有32.1%的时间INR不在目标范围内,其中15.4%的INR值> 3.0,16.7%的INR值< 2.0。然而,控制最差的四分位数患者有71.6%的时间超出目标范围,而控制最佳的四分位数患者只有16.3%超出范围。INR检测之间的中位间隔时间为16天。随着INR监测时间的延长,超出目标范围的时间减少,从监测的前三个月的52%降至两年后的30%。多因素逻辑回归模型显示,超出范围时间增加10%与死亡率增加(比值比(OR)1.29,p < 0.001)、缺血性卒中风险增加(OR 1.10,p = 0.006)以及其他血栓栓塞事件风险增加(OR 1.12,p < 0.001)相关。当INR不在目标范围内时,住院率更高。
即使在控制良好的人群中,抗凝治疗欠佳也与不良临床结局相关。然而,良好的控制难以实现和维持。需要新的措施来改善NVAF患者的维持性抗凝治疗。