Fibrilación auricular y terapéutica anticoagulante

La fibrilación auricular es la taquiarritmia más frecuente en la población general. La frecuencia de dicha arritmia aumenta con la edad, presentándose en un 1.5% de los 50 a 59 años a 8-10% de los 80 a 89 años. La fibrilación auricular incrementa el riesgo de sufrir un evento cerebrovascular isquémico cardioembólico en 5 veces y causa el 15% de todos los accidentes cerebrovasculares isquémicos. El manejo de la fibrilación auricular se enfoca, principalmente, en la prevención de los fenómenos tromboembólicos y en el control de la frecuencia y ritmo cardiaco. La anticoagulación, ha demostrado ser la principal herramienta en la prevención de eventos cardioembólicos. Aunque las complicaciones hemorrágicas por el tratamiento son esperables, y aumentan con la edad, sobrepasa por mucho, el beneficio de usar anticoagulación, al riesgo de sangrados. Precisamente debido a la heterogeneidad clínica de esta arritmia y a la dificultad de establecer un tratamiento adecuado para cada caso en particular, el American College of Cardiology, la American Heart Association, la European Society of Cardiology y el American College of Chest Physicians han establecido unas guías para mejorar el manejo de los pacientes. La revisión de esta patología y de estas directrices propuestas pueden facilitar y mejorar notablemente el tratamiento de los pacientes con fibrilación auricular.Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent arrhythmia in general population. Its frequency increases with age, being 1.5% from 50 to 59 years old and 8-10% from 80 to 89 years old. Atrial fibrillation increases 5 fold the risk of suffering a stroke and causes 15% of all strokes. Atrial fibrillation management focuses in the prevention of thromboembolic phenomena and heart rate and rhythm control. Anticoagulation, when is indicated, has demonstrated to be the main tool in the prevention of these thromboembolic events. Although bleeding complications are frequent in this population and increase with age, anticoagulation benefits are greater than the risks of bleeding. Due to the clinically heterogeneous nature of this arrythmia and the difficulty of establishing appropriate treatment for each particular case, the American College of Cardiology, the American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology and American College of Chest Physicians have established guidelines to improve the management these patients. The review of thist condition and the proposed directives can notably facilitate and improve the mangement of the patients with atrial fibrillation.Fil: Prieto, S.. Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires. Servicio de HematologíaFil: Ceresetto, J.. Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires. Servicio de Hematologí

2022 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, including patients with COVID-19

The International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer is an independent academic working group of experts aimed at establishing global consensus for the treatment and prophylaxis of cancer-associated thrombosis. The 2013, 2016, and 2019 International Initiative on Thrombosis and Cancer clinical practice guidelines have been made available through a free, web-based mobile phone application. The 2022 clinical practice guidelines, which are based on a literature review up to Jan 1, 2022, include guidance for patients with cancer and with COVID-19. Key recommendations (grade 1A or 1B) include: (1) low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) for the initial (first 10 days) treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis; (2) direct oral anticoagulants for the initial treatment and maintenance treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis in patients who are not at high risk of gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding, in the absence of strong drug–drug interactions or of gastrointestinal absorption impairment; (3) LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants for a minimum of 6 months to treat cancer-associated thrombosis; (4) extended prophylaxis (4 weeks) with LMWHs to prevent postoperative venous thromboembolism after major abdominopelvic surgery in patients not at high risk of bleeding; and (5) primary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism with LMWHs or direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban or apixaban) in ambulatory patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who are treated with anticancer therapy and have a low risk of bleeding

Apixaban versus Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis in Medically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of prolonging prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients beyond hospital discharge remain uncertain. We hypothesized that extended prophylaxis with apixaban would be safe and more effective than short-term prophylaxis with enoxaparin. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 days to receive apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days, or enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day composite of death related to venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, or asymptomatic proximal-leg deep-vein thrombosis, as detected with the use of systematic bilateral compression ultrasonography on day 30. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. All efficacy and safety outcomes were independently adjudicated. RESULTS: A total of 6528 subjects underwent randomization, 4495 of whom could be evaluated for the primary efficacy outcome--2211 in the apixaban group and 2284 in the enoxaparin group. Among the patients who could be evaluated, 2.71% in the apixaban group (60 patients) and 3.06% in the enoxaparin group (70 patients) met the criteria for the primary efficacy outcome (relative risk with apixaban, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.23; P=0.44). By day 30, major bleeding had occurred in 0.47% of the patients in the apixaban group (15 of 3184 patients) and in 0.19% of the patients in the enoxaparin group (6 of 3217 patients) (relative risk, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.24; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In medically ill patients, an extended course of thromboprophylaxis with apixaban was not superior to a shorter course with enoxaparin. Apixaban was associated with significantly more major bleeding events than was enoxaparin. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00457002.)