Komen Joris, Forslund Tomas, Hjemdahl Paul, Wettermark Björn
Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institute, Karolinska University Hospital, T2, 171 76, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 99, 3584, CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Oct;73(10):1315-1322. doi: 10.1007/s00228-017-2289-0. Epub 2017 Jun 29.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of patient characteristics such as age and stroke and bleeding risks on decisions for antithrombotic treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
This was a retrospective, population-based study including AF patients initiated with either warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or low-dose aspirin (ASA) between March 2015 and February 2016. Multivariate models were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for factors associated with treatment decisions.
A total of 6765 newly initiated patients were included, most with apixaban (46.4%) and least with ASA (6.7%). There were more comorbidities in patients initiated with ASA or warfarin compared to the cohort average. Patients with high stroke risks had higher chances of receiving ASA (CHADS-VASc ≥5 vs 0; aOR 2.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-3.33). Among patients receiving oral anticoagulants, patients with high bleeding risks more often received warfarin (ATRIA score 5-10 vs 0-3; aOR 1.40; CI 1.20-1.64). Among NOACs, apixaban was preferred for patients with higher stroke risks (aOR 1.78; CI 1.31-2.41), high bleeding risks (aOR 1.54; CI 1.26-1.88) and high age (age group ≥85 vs 0-65; aOR 1.84; CI 1.44-2.35). Conversely, dabigatran treatment was associated with lower ages and lower risks.
High stroke and bleeding risks favored choices of warfarin or ASA. Among patients receiving NOACs, apixaban was favored for elderly and high-risk patients whereas dabigatran was used in lower risk patients. The inadvertent use of ASA, especially among those with high stroke risks, should be further discouraged.
本研究旨在调查年龄、中风及出血风险等患者特征对心房颤动(AF)患者抗栓治疗决策的影响。
这是一项基于人群的回顾性研究,纳入了2015年3月至2016年2月期间开始使用华法林、达比加群、利伐沙班、阿哌沙班或低剂量阿司匹林(ASA)的AF患者。采用多变量模型计算与治疗决策相关因素的调整比值比(aOR)。
共纳入6765例新开始治疗的患者,大多数使用阿哌沙班(46.4%),最少使用ASA(6.7%)。与队列平均水平相比,开始使用ASA或华法林的患者合并症更多。中风风险高的患者接受ASA治疗的可能性更高(CHADS-VASc≥5对比0;aOR 2.01;95%置信区间(CI)1.12 - 3.33)。在接受口服抗凝剂治疗的患者中,出血风险高的患者更常接受华法林治疗(ATRIA评分5 - 10对比0 - 3;aOR 1.40;CI 1.20 - 1.64)。在新型口服抗凝药(NOACs)中,中风风险较高(aOR 1.78;CI 1.31 - 2.41)、出血风险较高(aOR 1.54;CI 1.26 - 1.88)及年龄较大(年龄组≥85对比0 - 65;aOR 1.84;CI 1.44 - 2.35)的患者更倾向于选择阿哌沙班。相反地,达比加群治疗与较低年龄和较低风险相关。
高中风和出血风险有利于选择华法林或ASA。在接受NOACs治疗的患者中,阿哌沙班更适合老年和高危患者,而达比加群则用于风险较低的患者。应进一步避免ASA的不当使用,尤其是在中风风险高的患者中。