Familial clustering of venous thromboembolism:a Danish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND: Identification of risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is of utmost importance to improve current prophylactic regimes and treatment guidelines. The extent to which a family history contributes to the risk of VTE needs further exploration.OBJECTIVES: To examine the relative rate of VTE in first-degree relatives compared with the general population.METHODS: By crosslinking Danish nationwide registries we identified patients with VTE between 1978 and 2012, and their familial relations. The first member in a family to acquire VTE was defined as the proband. All first-degree relatives to probands were followed from the VTE date of the proband and until an event (VTE), death, emigration, 100 year birthday or end of study: 31st of December 2012, whichever came first. The relative rate of VTE was estimated by standardized incidence ratios (SIR) using time-dependent Poisson regression models, with the general population as a fixed reference.RESULTS: We identified 70,767 children of maternal probands, 66,065 children of paternal probands, and 29,183 siblings to sibling probands. Having a maternal proband or a paternal proband were associated with a significantly increased VTE rate of 2.15 (CI: 2.00-2.30) and 2.06 (CI: 1.92-2.21), respectively. The highest estimate of VTE was observed among siblings (adjusted SIR of 2.60 [CI: 2.38-2.83]). Noteworthy, the rate of VTE increased for all first-degree relatives when the proband was diagnosed with VTE in a young age (≤ 50 years).CONCLUSION: A family history of VTE was associated with a significantly increased rate of VTE among first-degree relatives compared with the general population.</p

Outcomes associated with familial versus nonfamilial atrial fibrillation:a matched nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND: We examined all‐cause mortality and long‐term thromboembolic risk (ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic thromboembolism) in patients with and without familial atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Danish nationwide registry data, we identified all patients diagnosed with AF (1995–2012) and divided them into those with familial AF (having a first‐degree family member with a prior AF admission) and those with nonfamilial AF. We paired those with and without familial AF according to age, year of AF diagnosis, and sex in a 1:1 match. Using cumulative incidence and multivariable Cox models, we examined the risk of long‐term outcomes. We identified 8658 AF patients (4329 matched pairs) with and without familial AF. The median age was 50 years (interquartile range 43–54 years), and 21.4% were women. Compared with nonfamilial AF patients, those with familial AF had slightly less comorbid illness but similar overall CHA (2) DS (2)‐VASc score (P=0.155). Median follow‐up was 3.4 years (interquartile range 1.5–6.5 years). Patients with familial AF had risk of death and thromboembolism similar to those with nonfamilial AF (adjusted hazard ratio 0.91 [95% CI 0.79–1.04] for death and 0.90 [95% CI 0.71–1.14] for thromboembolism). CONCLUSIONS: Although family history of AF is associated with increased likelihood for development of AF, once AF developed, long‐term risks of death and thromboembolic complications were similar in familial and nonfamilial AF patients

Stroke and recurrent haemorrhage associated with antithrombotic treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation:nationwide cohort study

Study question What are the risks of all cause mortality, thromboembolism, major bleeding, and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding associated with restarting antithrombotic treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation? Methods This Danish cohort study (1996-2012) included all patients with atrial fibrillation discharged from hospital after gastrointestinal bleeding while receiving antithrombotic treatment. Restarted treatment regimens were single or combined antithrombotic drugs with oral anticoagulation and antiplatelets. Follow-up started 90 days after discharge to avoid confounding from use of previously prescribed drugs on discharge. Risks of all cause mortality, thromboembolism, major bleeding, and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding were estimated with competing risks models and time dependent multiple Cox regression models. Study answer and limitations 4602 patients (mean age 78 years) were included. Within two years, 39.9% (95% confidence interval 38.4% to 41.3%, n=1745) of the patients had died, 12.0% (11.0% to 13.0%, n=526) had experienced thromboembolism, 17.7% (16.5% to 18.8%, n=788) major bleeding, and 12.1% (11.1% to 13.1%, n=546) recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. 27.1% (n=924) of patients did not resume antithrombotic treatment. Compared with non-resumption of treatment, a reduced risk of all cause mortality was found in association with restart of oral anticoagulation (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 0.46), an antiplatelet agent (0.76, 0.68 to 0.86), and oral anticoagulation plus an antiplatelet agent (0.41, 0.32 to 0.52), and a reduced risk of thromboembolism was found in association with restart of oral anticoagulation (0.41, 0.31 to 0.54), an antiplatelet agent (0.76, 0.61 to 0.95), and oral anticoagulation plus an antiplatelet agent (0.54, 0.36 to 0.82). Restarting oral anticoagulation alone was the only regimen with an increased risk of major bleeding (1.37, 1.06 to 1.77) compared with non-resumption of treatment; however, the difference in risk of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding was not significant between patients who restarted an antithrombotic treatment regimen and those who did not resume treatment. What this study adds Among patients with atrial fibrillation who experience gastrointestinal bleeding while receiving antithrombotic treatment; subsequent restart of oral anticoagulation alone was associated with better outcomes for all cause mortality and thromboembolism compared with patients who did not resume treatment. This was despite an increased longitudinal associated risk of bleeding. Funding, competing interests, data sharing This study was supported by a grant from Boehringer-Ingelheim. Competing interests are available in the full paper on bmj.com. The authors have no additional data to share