Suppr超能文献

非瓣膜性心房颤动住院患者的抗凝治疗应用、桥接治疗的流行情况及其与住院时间的关系。

Anticoagulant use, the prevalence of bridging, and relation to length of stay among hospitalized patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

机构信息

Truven Health Analytics Inc., Washington, DC 20008, USA.

出版信息

Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2012 Dec 1;12(6):403-13. doi: 10.1007/BF03262474.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to describe inpatient anticoagulation and bridging in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and to identify whether differences exist in length of stay (LOS) among bridged versus non-bridged NVAF patients.

DESIGN

Administrative claims data were used to select patients ≥18 years with a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis of NVAF and inpatient warfarin use from 1 July 2004 to 30 September 2009. Patients with valvular or transient causes of NVAF or pregnancy were excluded. Inpatient bridging was defined as receipt of an anticoagulant in addition to warfarin during the hospitalization. LOS was reported for non-bridged patients (warfarin only) and compared with three bridging regimens: low molecular weight heparin/pentasaccharide (LMWH/PS); unfractionated heparin (UFH); and two-agent bridging (LMWH/PS and UFH). Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the association between bridging and LOS, adjusting for demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Of 6340 NVAF patients, 48% received inpatient warfarin (mean LOS 5.5 days); among them, 64% received bridging therapy (mean LOS 6.3 days) [LMWH/PS 45% (mean LOS 5.6 days), UFH 36% (mean LOS 6.0 days), two-agent bridging 18% (mean LOS 8.4 days)]. Following multivariate analysis, relative to patients who received inpatient warfarin only, LOS was significantly higher for patients with UFH (19.3%) and patients with two-agent bridging (45.1%). Patients with pre-period warfarin, cancer, or diabetes mellitus who received bridging agents had significantly longer LOS than patients with those conditions who were not bridged.

CONCLUSION

LOS was longer for bridged than non-bridged patients. Further studies are needed to identify predictors of bridging and to explain why bridged NVAF patients had longer LOS.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在描述非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者的住院抗凝和桥接治疗,并确定桥接与非桥接 NVAF 患者的住院时间(LOS)是否存在差异。

设计

使用行政索赔数据,选择 2004 年 7 月 1 日至 2009 年 9 月 30 日期间,年龄≥18 岁、初次或二次出院诊断为 NVAF 且住院期间使用华法林的患者。排除有瓣膜或短暂性 NVAF 或妊娠的患者。住院桥接定义为在住院期间除华法林外还接受抗凝治疗。报告非桥接患者(仅华法林)的 LOS,并与三种桥接方案进行比较:低分子肝素/戊聚糖(LMWH/PS);普通肝素(UFH);和两药桥接(LMWH/PS 和 UFH)。进行多变量分析,以评估桥接与 LOS 之间的关联,调整人口统计学和临床变量。

结果

在 6340 例 NVAF 患者中,48%接受了住院华法林治疗(平均 LOS 为 5.5 天);其中,64%接受了桥接治疗(平均 LOS 为 6.3 天)[LMWH/PS 占 45%(平均 LOS 为 5.6 天),UFH 占 36%(平均 LOS 为 6.0 天),两药桥接占 18%(平均 LOS 为 8.4 天)]。多变量分析后,与仅接受住院华法林治疗的患者相比,UFH(19.3%)和两药桥接(45.1%)患者的 LOS 显著更高。接受桥接药物的有预治疗期华法林、癌症或糖尿病的患者与未桥接的患者相比,LOS 显著更长。

结论

桥接患者的 LOS 长于非桥接患者。需要进一步研究以确定桥接的预测因素,并解释为什么桥接 NVAF 患者的 LOS 更长。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2d84/3713944/2f9782106fee/40256_2012_2474_Tab1.jpg

相似文献

2
Predictors of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation patients in the inpatient setting.
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2010;10(1):37-48. doi: 10.2165/11318870-000000000-00000.
5
Is rivaroxaban associated with lower inpatient costs compared to warfarin among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Curr Med Res Opin. 2014 Aug;30(8):1521-8. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2014.916159. Epub 2014 May 2.
9
Impact of atrial fibrillation and oral anticoagulation on hospital costs and length of stay.
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2012 Feb 15;69(4):329-38. doi: 10.2146/ajhp110203.

本文引用的文献

1
Implantation of cardiac rhythm devices during concomitant anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2011 May;9(5):609-14. doi: 10.1586/erc.11.48.
2
Estimation of total incremental health care costs in patients with atrial fibrillation in the United States.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011 May;4(3):313-20. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.958165. Epub 2011 May 3.
3
A clinician's guide to perioperative bridging for patients on oral anticoagulation.
J Pharm Pract. 2010 Aug;23(4):303-12. doi: 10.1177/0897190010363276. Epub 2010 May 7.
4
Update in bridging anticoagulation.
J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2011 Apr;31(3):259-64. doi: 10.1007/s11239-011-0571-z.
9
Low molecular weight heparin bridging for atrial fibrillation: is VTE thromboprophylaxis the major benefit?
J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2010 Nov;30(4):479-85. doi: 10.1007/s11239-010-0470-8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验