The health care setting rather than medical speciality impacts on physicians adherence to guideline-conform anticoagulation in outpatients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a cross sectional survey

BACKGROUND: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) at high risk for stroke guidelines consistently recommend long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) with a vitamin K antagonist. However recommendations remain ambiguous in respect to the precise OAC initiation regimens. Based on the clinical observation, that the initiation of OAC for NVAF varies considerably in daily practice, we aimed to assess the current practice in Switzerland. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of randomly selected general practitioners, internists and cardiologists from different health care settings in an urban Swiss region that covers 1.4 million inhabitants. The main outcome measures were the preferred antithrombotic initiation regimen and long-term treatment in patients with newly diagnosed NVAF at high risk for stroke. RESULTS: We received 226 out of 388 (58.2%) surveys. Compared to physicians working in a hospital setting (33.6% of respondents) physicians in ambulatory care reported more years of experience and claimed lower-use (never or seldom) of guidelines in general (47.6 vs. 12.2%). Regarding long-term thromboembolic prophylaxis 93.7% of all responders followed current recommendation by choosing an OAC. When focussing on guideline-consistent correct OAC initiation (either low-dose initial OAC or a combination of LMWH and OAC) adherence dropped to 60.6% with hospital physicians demonstrating a significantly higher use of guideline-conform OAC regimens (79.7 vs. 51.0%). Medical speciality in non-hospital physicians was not related to correct guideline-use. Hospital setting remained independently associated with a guideline-conform OAC initiation regimen (OR 2.8, p = 0.023) when controlled for medical speciality, physicians' characteristics and clinical experience. Problems when starting an anticoagulation treatment were seldom reported (never or seldom accounting for 94.1% of all responses). CONCLUSIONS: The guideline adherence with respect to OAC initiation regimens in NVAF was significantly lower when compared to long-term treatment and health care setting rather than medical speciality explained guideline-conform OAC initiation. The majority of the physicians did not consider the initiation of anticoagulation to be a major obstacle in outpatient care

Protein C anticoagulant system—anti-inflammatory effects

Activated protein C (APC) plays active roles in preventing progression of a number of disease processes. These include thrombosis due to its direct anticoagulant activity which is likely augmented by its cytoprotective activity, thereby limiting exposure of procoagulant cellular membrane surfaces on cells. Beyond that, the pathway signals the cells to prevent apoptosis, to dampen inflammation, to increase endothelial barrier function, and to selectively downregulate some genes implicated in disease progression. Most of these functions are manifested to APC binding to endothelial protein C receptor (EPCR) allowing PAR1 activation, but activation of other PARS is also implicated in some cases. In addition to EPCR orchestrating these changes, CD11b is also capable of supporting APC signaling. Selective control of these pathways offers potential in new therapeutic approaches to disease

Evidence-based approach to thrombophilia testing

Thrombophilia can be identified in about half of all patients presenting with VTE. Testing has increased tremendously for various indications, but whether the results of such tests help in the clinical management of patients has not been settled. I use evidence from observational studies to conclude that testing for hereditary thrombophilia generally does not alter the clinical management of patients with VTE, with occasional exceptions for women at fertile age. Because testing for thrombophilia only serves limited purpose this should not be performed on a routine basis

The potential benefits of low-molecular-weight heparins in cancer patients

Cancer patients are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism due to a range of factors directly related to their disease and its treatment. Given the high incidence of post-surgical venous thromboembolism in cancer patients and the poor outcomes associated with its development, thromboprophylaxis is warranted. A number of evidence-based guidelines delineate anticoagulation regimens for venous thromboembolism treatment, primary and secondary prophylaxis, and long-term anticoagulation in cancer patients. However, many give equal weight to several different drugs and do not make specific recommendations regarding duration of therapy. In terms of their efficacy and safety profiles, practicality of use, and cost-effectiveness the low-molecular-weight heparins are at least comparable to, and offer several advantages over, other available antithrombotics in cancer patients. In addition, data are emerging that the antithrombotics, and particularly low-molecular-weight heparins, may exert an antitumor effect which could contribute to improved survival in cancer patients when given for long-term prophylaxis. Such findings reinforce the importance of thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin in cancer patients