Uninterrupted DOACs Approach for Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: Do DOACs Levels Matter?

Front Cardiovasc Med

Université catholique de Louvain, Department of Anesthesiology, Namur Thrombosis and Hemostasis Center, Namur Research Institute for Life Sciences, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire UCL Namur, Namur, Belgium.

Published: March 2022


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Most patients present for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (CAAF) with residual or full effect of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). In daily practice, it has been observed that the activated clotting time (ACT) was actually poorly sensitive to the effect of DOACs and that patients on DOACs required more unfractionated heparin (UFH) to achieve the ACT target of 300 s during the procedure, leading some authors to worry about potential overdosing. Conversely, we hypothesize that these higher doses of UFH are necessary to achieve adequate hemostasis during CAAF regardless of the residual effect of DOACs. During CAAF, thrombosis is promoted mainly by the presence of thrombogenic sheaths and catheters in the bloodstream. Preclinical data suggest that only high doses of DOACs are able to mitigate catheter-induced thrombin generation, whereas low dose UFH already do so. In addition, the effect of UFH seems to be lower in patients on DOACs, compared to patients on VKAs, explaining part of the differences observed in heparin requirements. Clinical studies could not identify increased bleeding risk in patients on DOACs compared to those on VKAs despite similar efficacy during CAAF procedures. Moreover, targeting a lower ACT was associated with an increased periprocedural thrombotic risk for both DOAC and VKA patients. Therefore, the low sensitivity of the ACT to the residual effect of DOACs should not be a major concern in its use in the interventional cardiology laboratory.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9001940PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.864899DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

patients doacs
12
doacs
9
catheter ablation
8
ablation atrial
8
atrial fibrillation
8
caaf residual
8
ufh achieve
8
residual doacs
8
doacs compared
8
patients
6

Similar Publications

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality globally. Although direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have improved extended VTE treatment, the optimal dose for balancing efficacy and safety remains unclear.

Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of reduced-dose DOACs vs full-dose regimens during extended anticoagulation for VTE.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with cancer-associated VTE. Limited data are available on treatment, particularly in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We aimed to evaluate current management strategies and outcomes in patients with cancer and recurrent VTE during treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or DOACs.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Critically ill adults are more commonly being admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with a recent history of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use. No consensus guidance exists on optimal anticoagulation strategies in critically ill adults with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) on DOAC's prior to ICU admission, and there is considerable variability in clinical practice. To evaluate rates of major bleeding and thrombosis between 2 anticoagulation strategies for NVAF upon ICU admission: package insert (continuation of oral or parenteral anticoagulation per manufacturer recommendations) vs non-package insert (prophylactic dosing or delayed therapeutic anticoagulation).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Medicare plans employ drug utilization management strategies, including prior authorization (PA) and step therapy (ST), or formulary tier increases, to control spending. However, PA and ST can delay treatment access and encourage use of less effective/safe therapies, while formulary tier increases can lead to treatment switching/discontinuation due to higher patient out-of-pocket costs. This study modeled the impact of restricted access to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and a tier increase for apixaban, on incidence and cost of clinical events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the United States.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

BackgroundCancer patients are at significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in this population. While traditional anticoagulants like low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are commonly used, their limitations have prompted growing interest in direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), particularly Factor Xa inhibitors. However, concerns about bleeding risks persist.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF