Integrated care in patients with atrial fibrillation- a predictive heterogeneous treatment effect analysis of the ALL-IN trial

Introduction:Integrated care is effective in reducing all-cause mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in primary care, though time and resource intensive. The aim of the current study was to assess whether integrated care should be directed at all AF patients equally. Methods:The ALL-IN trial (n = 1,240 patients, median age 77 years) was a cluster-randomized trial in which primary care practices were randomized to provide integrated care or usual care to AF patients aged 65 years and older. Integrated care comprised of (i) anticoagulation monitoring, (ii) quarterly checkups and (iii) easy-access consultation with cardiologists. For the current analysis, cox proportional hazard analysis with all clinical variables from the CHA2DS2-VASc score was used to predict all-cause mortality in the ALL-IN trial. Subsequently, the hazard ratio and absolute risk reduction were plotted as a function of this predicted mortality risk to explore treatment heterogeneity. Results:Under usual care, after a median of 2 years follow-up the absolute risk of all-cause mortality in the highest-risk quarter was 31.0%, compared to 4.6% in the lowest-risk quarter. On the relative scale, there was no evidence of treatment heterogeneity (p for interaction = 0.90). However, there was substantial treatment heterogeneity on the absolute scale: risk reduction in the lowest risk- quarter of risk 3.3% (95% CI -0.4% - 7.0) compared to 12.0% (95% CI 2.7% - 22.0) in the highest risk quarter. Conclusion:While the relative degree of benefit from integrated AF care is similar in all patients, patients with a high all-cause mortality risk have a greater benefit on an absolute scale and should therefore be prioritized when implementing integrated care.</p

Diagnostic and societal impact of implementing the syncope guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (SYNERGY study)

Background: Syncope management is fraught with unnecessary tests and frequent failure to establish a diagnosis. We evaluated the potential of implementing the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Syncope Guidelines regarding diagnostic yield, accuracy and costs.Methods: A multicentre pre-post study in five Dutch hospitals comparing two groups of syncope patients visiting the emergency department: one before intervention (usual care; from March 2017 to February 2019) and one afterwards (from October 2017 to September 2019). The intervention consisted of the simultaneous implementation of the ESC Syncope Guidelines with quick referral routes to a syncope unit when indicated. The primary objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy using logistic regression analysis accounting for the study site. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic yield, syncope-related healthcare and societal costs. One-year follow-up data were used to define a gold standard reference diagnosis by applying ESC criteria or, if not possible, evaluation by an expert committee. We determined the accuracy by comparing the treating physician’s diagnosis with the reference diagnosis.Results: We included 521 patients (usual care, n = 275; syncope guidelines intervention, n = 246). The syncope guidelines intervention resulted in a higher diagnostic accuracy in the syncope guidelines group than in the usual care group (86% vs.69%; risk ratio 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23) and a higher diagnostic yield (89% vs. 76%, 95% CI of the difference 6 to 19%). Syncope-related healthcare costs did not differ between the groups, yet the syncope guideline implementation resulted in lower total syncope-related societal costs compared to usual care (saving €908 per patient; 95% CI €34 to €1782).Conclusions: ESC Syncope Guidelines implementation in the emergency department with quick referral routes to a syncope unit improved diagnostic yield and accuracy and lowered societal costs.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6268.</p

Diagnostic and societal impact of implementing the syncope guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (SYNERGY study)

Background: Syncope management is fraught with unnecessary tests and frequent failure to establish a diagnosis. We evaluated the potential of implementing the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Syncope Guidelines regarding diagnostic yield, accuracy and costs.Methods: A multicentre pre-post study in five Dutch hospitals comparing two groups of syncope patients visiting the emergency department: one before intervention (usual care; from March 2017 to February 2019) and one afterwards (from October 2017 to September 2019). The intervention consisted of the simultaneous implementation of the ESC Syncope Guidelines with quick referral routes to a syncope unit when indicated. The primary objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy using logistic regression analysis accounting for the study site. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic yield, syncope-related healthcare and societal costs. One-year follow-up data were used to define a gold standard reference diagnosis by applying ESC criteria or, if not possible, evaluation by an expert committee. We determined the accuracy by comparing the treating physician’s diagnosis with the reference diagnosis.Results: We included 521 patients (usual care, n = 275; syncope guidelines intervention, n = 246). The syncope guidelines intervention resulted in a higher diagnostic accuracy in the syncope guidelines group than in the usual care group (86% vs.69%; risk ratio 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23) and a higher diagnostic yield (89% vs. 76%, 95% CI of the difference 6 to 19%). Syncope-related healthcare costs did not differ between the groups, yet the syncope guideline implementation resulted in lower total syncope-related societal costs compared to usual care (saving €908 per patient; 95% CI €34 to €1782).Conclusions: ESC Syncope Guidelines implementation in the emergency department with quick referral routes to a syncope unit improved diagnostic yield and accuracy and lowered societal costs.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6268.</p

Diagnostic and societal impact of implementing the syncope guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (SYNERGY study)

Background: Syncope management is fraught with unnecessary tests and frequent failure to establish a diagnosis. We evaluated the potential of implementing the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Syncope Guidelines regarding diagnostic yield, accuracy and costs.Methods: A multicentre pre-post study in five Dutch hospitals comparing two groups of syncope patients visiting the emergency department: one before intervention (usual care; from March 2017 to February 2019) and one afterwards (from October 2017 to September 2019). The intervention consisted of the simultaneous implementation of the ESC Syncope Guidelines with quick referral routes to a syncope unit when indicated. The primary objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy using logistic regression analysis accounting for the study site. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic yield, syncope-related healthcare and societal costs. One-year follow-up data were used to define a gold standard reference diagnosis by applying ESC criteria or, if not possible, evaluation by an expert committee. We determined the accuracy by comparing the treating physician’s diagnosis with the reference diagnosis.Results: We included 521 patients (usual care, n = 275; syncope guidelines intervention, n = 246). The syncope guidelines intervention resulted in a higher diagnostic accuracy in the syncope guidelines group than in the usual care group (86% vs.69%; risk ratio 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23) and a higher diagnostic yield (89% vs. 76%, 95% CI of the difference 6 to 19%). Syncope-related healthcare costs did not differ between the groups, yet the syncope guideline implementation resulted in lower total syncope-related societal costs compared to usual care (saving €908 per patient; 95% CI €34 to €1782).Conclusions: ESC Syncope Guidelines implementation in the emergency department with quick referral routes to a syncope unit improved diagnostic yield and accuracy and lowered societal costs.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6268.</p

Complex clinical scenarios with the use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: a multidisciplinary expert advisory board

The risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and the risk of stroke both increase with advancing age. As such, many individuals have, or will develop, an indication for oral anticoagulation to reduce the risk of stroke. Currently, a large number of anticoagulants are available, including vitamin K antagonists, direct thrombin or factor Xa inhibitors (the last two also referred to as direct oral anticoagulants or DOACs), and different dosages are available. Of the DOACs, rivaroxaban can be obtained in the most different doses: 2.5 mg, 5 mg, 15 mg and 20 mg. Many patients develop co-morbidities and/or undergo procedures that may require the temporary combination of anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy. In daily practice, clinicians encounter complex scenarios that are not always described in the treatment guidelines, and clear recommendations are lacking. Here, we report the outcomes of a multidisciplinary advisory board meeting, held in Utrecht (The Netherlands) on 3 June 2019, on decision making in complex clinical situations regarding the use of DOACs. The advisory board consisted of Dutch cardiovascular specialists: (interventional) cardiologist, internist, neurologist, vascular surgeon and general practitioners invited according to personal title and specific field of expertise

Safety of Switching From a Vitamin K Antagonist to a Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant in Frail Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation:Results of the FRAIL-AF Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: There is ambiguity whether frail patients with atrial fibrillation managed with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) should be switched to a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial. Older patients with atrial fibrillation living with frailty (≥75 years of age plus a Groningen Frailty Indicator score ≥3) were randomly assigned to switch from international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC or to continued VKA treatment. Patients with a glomerular filtration rate &lt;30 mL·min -1·1.73 m -2or with valvular atrial fibrillation were excluded. Follow-up was 12 months. The cause-specific hazard ratio was calculated for occurrence of the primary outcome that was a major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding complication, whichever came first, accounting for death as a competing risk. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes included thromboembolic events. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and June 2022, a total of 2621 patients were screened for eligibility and 1330 patients were randomly assigned (mean age 83 years, median Groningen Frailty Indicator score 4). After randomization, 6 patients in the switch-to-NOAC arm and 1 patient in the continue-with-VKA arm were excluded due to the presence of exclusion criteria, leaving 662 patients switched from a VKA to an NOAC and 661 patients continued VKAs in the intention-to-treat population. After 163 primary outcome events (101 in the switch arm, 62 in the continue arm), the trial was stopped for futility according to a prespecified futility analysis. The hazard ratio for our primary outcome was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.23-2.32). The hazard ratio for thromboembolic events was 1.26 (95% CI, 0.60-2.61). CONCLUSIONS: Switching international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC in frail older patients with atrial fibrillation was associated with more bleeding complications compared with continuing VKA treatment, without an associated reduction in thromboembolic complications. REGISTRATION: URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 2017-000393-11. URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 6721 (FRAIL-AF study).</p

Safety of Switching From a Vitamin K Antagonist to a Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant in Frail Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation:Results of the FRAIL-AF Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: There is ambiguity whether frail patients with atrial fibrillation managed with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) should be switched to a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC). METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled superiority trial. Older patients with atrial fibrillation living with frailty (≥75 years of age plus a Groningen Frailty Indicator score ≥3) were randomly assigned to switch from international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC or to continued VKA treatment. Patients with a glomerular filtration rate &lt;30 mL·min -1·1.73 m -2or with valvular atrial fibrillation were excluded. Follow-up was 12 months. The cause-specific hazard ratio was calculated for occurrence of the primary outcome that was a major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding complication, whichever came first, accounting for death as a competing risk. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes included thromboembolic events. RESULTS: Between January 2018 and June 2022, a total of 2621 patients were screened for eligibility and 1330 patients were randomly assigned (mean age 83 years, median Groningen Frailty Indicator score 4). After randomization, 6 patients in the switch-to-NOAC arm and 1 patient in the continue-with-VKA arm were excluded due to the presence of exclusion criteria, leaving 662 patients switched from a VKA to an NOAC and 661 patients continued VKAs in the intention-to-treat population. After 163 primary outcome events (101 in the switch arm, 62 in the continue arm), the trial was stopped for futility according to a prespecified futility analysis. The hazard ratio for our primary outcome was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.23-2.32). The hazard ratio for thromboembolic events was 1.26 (95% CI, 0.60-2.61). CONCLUSIONS: Switching international normalized ratio-guided VKA treatment to an NOAC in frail older patients with atrial fibrillation was associated with more bleeding complications compared with continuing VKA treatment, without an associated reduction in thromboembolic complications. REGISTRATION: URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 2017-000393-11. URL: https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; Unique identifier: 6721 (FRAIL-AF study).</p

Prevalence and Predictors of Non-Adherence to Direct Oral Anticoagulant Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND: For most patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists. However, there is concern that the lack of monitoring may impair therapy adherence and therefore the anticoagulant effect. OBJECTIVE: To assess one-year DOAC non-adherence in patient with AF and a treatment indication of at least one year in the Dutch healthcare setting, and to identify predictors of non-adherence. METHODS: We performed a near-nationwide historical cohort study in patients with a novel DOAC indication for AF. Data were obtained from a pharmacy database, covering 65% of all outpatient prescriptions dispensed in the Netherlands. The one-year non-adherence was assessed by the proportion of days covered (PDC); the threshold was set at <80%. Robust Poisson regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of non-adherence. RESULTS: 46,211 patients were included and the one-year non-adherence was 6.5%. We identified male sex (risk ratio [RR] 1.23, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.33), younger age (age ≥60 - <70 years: RR 1.15, 95%CI 1.00-1.33, age <60 years: RR 2.22, 95%CI 1.92-2.57; reference age ≥85 years), a reduced DOAC dose (RR 1.10, 95%CI 1.00–1.22), a twice daily dosing regimen (RR 1.21, 95%CI 1.12-1.30) and treatment with apixaban (RR 1.16, 95%CI 1.06-1.26, reference rivaroxaban) or dabigatran (RR 1.25, 95%CI 1.14-1.37) as independent predictors of one-year non-adherence. CONCLUSION: One year non-adherence to DOACs was low yet relevant in patients with AF newly prescribed a DOAC. Understanding the predictors for non-adherence may help identify patients at risk