Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT.
Blood. 2016 Dec 22;128(25):2891-2898. doi: 10.1182/blood-2016-07-693614. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and conveys a significant risk of morbidity and mortality due to related stroke and systemic embolism. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the mainstay of thromboembolism prevention, and management of anticoagulation can be challenging. For patients without significant valvular disease, decisions around anticoagulation therapy are first based on the presence of additional stroke risk factors, as measured by the CHADS-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75, diabetes, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74, and sex category [female]) score. Patients with increased CHADS-VASc scores (by regional guidelines) should next be evaluated to determine if they are candidates for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy. This should focus on assessment of concomitant valve disease and/or impaired renal function. In eligible patients, the cumulative data support a preference for NOACs over warfarin, as NOACs appear safer and more effective as a group. However, there are no direct, randomized comparisons between NOACs, and therefore, selecting among them can be difficult. In addition, important patient groups remain underrepresented in major clinical trials, and their management is often left to clinician judgment. Data from emerging clinical trials will help guide physicians; however, patient engagement in decisions regarding OAC management will remain vital to ensuring appropriate balance of risks and optimizing health outcomes.
心房颤动是最常见的心律失常,由于相关的中风和全身性栓塞,其发病率和死亡率都很高。口服抗凝剂(OAC)是预防血栓栓塞的主要方法,但抗凝管理可能具有挑战性。对于没有明显瓣膜疾病的患者,抗凝治疗的决策首先基于通过 CHADS-VASc(充血性心力衰竭、高血压、年龄≥75 岁、糖尿病、既往中风或短暂性脑缺血发作、血管疾病、年龄 65-74 岁和性别类别[女性])评分测量的其他中风危险因素的存在。根据区域指南,具有较高 CHADS-VASc 评分的患者应进一步评估,以确定他们是否适合使用非维生素 K 拮抗剂口服抗凝剂(NOAC)治疗。这应侧重于评估同时存在的瓣膜疾病和/或肾功能受损。在合格的患者中,累积数据支持 NOAC 优于华法林的偏好,因为 NOAC 作为一个群体似乎更安全、更有效。然而,NOAC 之间没有直接的随机比较,因此选择它们可能很困难。此外,重要的患者群体在主要临床试验中代表性不足,他们的管理通常取决于临床医生的判断。来自新兴临床试验的数据将有助于指导医生;然而,患者在 OAC 管理决策中的参与对于确保风险的适当平衡和优化健康结果仍然至关重要。