Saarland University Medical Center, Saarland University Faculty of Medicine, Internal Medicine IV - Nephrology and Hypertension, Homburg; Department of Cardiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen; Saarland University Medical Center, Saarland University Faculty of Medicine, Internal Medicine III - Cardiology, Angiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Homburg.
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2018 Apr 27;115(17):287-294. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0287.
Cardiological societies recommend, in their guidelines, that patients with atrial fibrillation and an intermediate (or higher) risk of stroke and systemic embolization should be treated with oral anticoagulant drugs. For patients who do not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis, non-vitamin-K dependent oral anticoagulants (NOAC) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for this purpose. It is unclear, however, whether patients with chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation benefit from oral anticoagulation to the same extent as those with normal kidney function. It is also unclear which of the two types of anti - coagulant drug is preferable for patients with chronic kidney disease; NOAC are, in part, renally eliminated.
This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective literature search, and on international guidelines.
Current evidence suggests that patients with atrial fibrillation who have chronic kidney disease with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) above 15 mL/ min/1.73 m² should be treated with an oral anticoagulant drug if they have an at least intermediate risk of embolization, as assessed with the CHA2DS2-VASc score. For patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (GFR from 15 to 29 mL/ min/1.73 m²), however, this recommendation is based only on registry studies. For dialysis patients with atrial fibrillation, decisions whether to give oral anticoagulant drugs should be taken on an individual basis, in view of the elevated risk of hemorrhage and the unclear efficacy of such drugs in these patients. The subgroup analyses of the NOAC approval studies show that, for patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease with a creatinine clearance of >25-30 mL/min, NOAC should be given in preference to VKA, as long as the patient does not have mitral valve stenosis or a mechanical valve prosthesis. For those whose creatinine clearance is less than 25 mL/min, the relative merits of NOAC versus VKA are still debated.
The cardiological societies' recommendation that patients with atrial fibrillation should be given oral anticoagulant drugs applies to the majority of such patients who also have chronic kidney disease.
心脏协会的指南建议,对于伴有中危(或更高)卒中和全身性栓塞风险的心房颤动患者,应使用口服抗凝药物进行治疗。对于无二尖瓣狭窄或机械瓣膜假体的患者,在这种情况下,非维生素 K 依赖性口服抗凝剂(NOAC)优于维生素 K 拮抗剂(VKA)。然而,目前尚不清楚慢性肾脏病合并心房颤动患者是否能从口服抗凝治疗中获益与肾功能正常的患者相同。也不清楚对于慢性肾脏病患者,哪种类型的抗凝药物更优;NOAC 部分通过肾脏清除。
本综述基于选择性文献检索获得的相关文献和国际指南。
目前的证据表明,对于肾小球滤过率(GFR)大于 15 mL/min/1.73 m²的慢性肾脏病合并心房颤动患者,如果CHA2DS2-VASc 评分评估栓塞风险为中危以上,应使用口服抗凝药物进行治疗。然而,对于慢性肾脏病晚期(GFR 为 15 至 29 mL/min/1.73 m²)患者,这一推荐仅基于登记研究。对于伴有心房颤动的透析患者,是否给予口服抗凝药物应根据个体情况决定,因为此类药物在这些患者中出血风险升高且疗效不明确。NOAC 批准研究的亚组分析表明,对于伴有慢性肾脏病且肌酐清除率>25-30 mL/min 的心房颤动患者,只要患者无二尖瓣狭窄或机械瓣膜假体,NOAC 应优先于 VKA 使用。对于肌酐清除率<25 mL/min 的患者,NOAC 与 VKA 的相对优势仍存在争议。
心脏协会建议心房颤动患者应使用口服抗凝药物,这一建议适用于大多数同时患有慢性肾脏病的此类患者。