Contemporary NSTEMI management: the role of the hospitalist.

Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is defined as elevated cardiac biomarkers of necrosis in the absence of persistent ST-segment elevation in the setting of anginal symptoms or other acute event. It carries a poorer prognosis than most ST-segment elevation events, owing to the typical comorbidity burden of the older NSTEMI patients as well as diverse etiologies that add complexity to therapeutic decision-making. It may result from an acute atherothrombotic event (\u27Type 1\u27) or as the result of other causes of mismatch of myocardial oxygen supply and demand (\u27Type 2\u27). Regardless of type and other clinical factors, the hospital medicine specialist is increasingly responsible for managing or coordinating the care of these patients. Following published guidelines for risk stratification and basing anti-anginal, anticoagulant, antiplatelet, other pharmacologic therapies, and overall management approach on that individualized patient risk assessment can be expected to result in better short- and long-term clinical outcomes, including near-term readmission and recurrent events. We present here a review of the evidence basis and expert commentary to assist the hospitalist in achieving those improved outcomes in NSTEMI. Given that the Society for Hospital Medicine cites care of patients with acute coronary syndrome as a core competency for hospitalists, it is essential that those specialists stay current on optimal NSTEMI care

Burden of major gastrointestinal bleeding among oral anticoagulant-treated non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients

BackgroundGastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common type of major bleeding associated with oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment. Patients with major bleeding are at an increased risk of a stroke if an OAC is not reinitiated.MethodsNon-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients initiating OACs were identified from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare data and four US commercial claims databases. Patients who had a major GI bleeding event (hospitalization with primary diagnosis of GI bleeding) while on an OAC were selected. A control cohort of patients without a major GI bleed during OAC treatment was matched to major GI bleeding patients using propensity scores. Stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and mortality (in the CMS population) were examined using Cox proportional hazards models with robust sandwich estimates.ResultsA total of 15,888 patients with major GI bleeding and 833,052 patients without major GI bleeding were included in the study. Within 90 days of the major GI bleed, 58% of patients discontinued the initial OAC treatment. Patients with a major GI bleed had a higher risk of stroke/SE [hazard ratio (HR): 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-1.74], major bleeding (HR: 2.79, 95% CI: 2.64-2.95), and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.23-1.36) than patients without a major GI bleed.ConclusionPatients with a major GI bleed on OAC had a high rate of OAC discontinuation and significantly higher risk of stroke/SE, major bleeding, and mortality after hospital discharge than those without. Effective management strategies are needed for patients with risk factors for major GI bleeding

Oral Anticoagulants for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with High Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding

IMPORTANCE: Many patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are at a high risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding due to conditions including older age; stage III to V chronic kidney disease (CKD); HAS-BLED (hypertension, kidney or liver disease, stroke history, prior bleeding, unstable international normalized ratio, age >65, drug or alcohol use) score of 3 or greater; corticosteroid, antiplatelet or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use; or GI conditions. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of stroke and/or systemic embolism (SE) and major bleeding (MB) among patients with NVAF and high risk of GI bleeding who received non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs those who received warfarin. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with NVAF who were 75 years and older; had stage III to V CKD; had an HAS-BLED score of 3 or greater; used corticosteroids, antiplatelets, or NSAIDs; or had GI conditions. Data were collected from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and 4 commercial insurance databases between January 1, 2012, and September 30, 2015. Data analysis was conducted from January 2012 to September 2015. EXPOSURES: New prescription for apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin between January 1, 2013, and September 30, 2015 (identification period). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Six propensity score–matched cohorts were created to compare between study drugs. For the primary objective, Cox models were used to estimate stroke and/or SE and MB hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: A total of 381 054 patients (187 489 [49.2%] women) with NVAF and at least 1 high-risk GI bleeding factor were identified (HAS-BLED score ≥3: 284 527 [74.7%]; aged ≥75 years: 252 835 [66.4%]; corticosteroid, antiplatelet, or NSAID therapy: 107 675 [28.3%]; prior GI bleeding conditions: 74 818 [19.6%]; and stage III-V CKD: 56 892 [14.9%]). All NOACs were associated with a lower risk of stroke and/or SE vs warfarin (apixaban: HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.52-0.68; dabigatran: HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64-0.88; rivaroxaban: HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.86). Compared with warfarin, apixaban and dabigatran were associated with a lower risk of MB (apixaban: HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63; dabigatran: HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.86), while rivaroxaban was associated with a higher risk (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study of patients with NVAF and high risk of GI bleed, NOACs were associated with lower rates of stroke and/or SE, but NOACs had varying risks of MB compared with warfarin. These results may help inform treatment options in this patient population

Thromboembolism and anticoagulant therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: interim clinical guidance from the anticoagulation forum

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral infection that can, in severe cases, result in cytokine storm, systemic inflammatory response and coagulopathy that is prognostic of poor outcomes. While some, but not all, laboratory findings appear similar to sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC), COVID-19- induced coagulopathy (CIC) appears to be more prothrombotic than hemorrhagic. It has been postulated that CIC may be an uncontrolled immunothrombotic response to COVID-19, and there is growing evidence of venous and arterial thromboembolic events in these critically ill patients. Clinicians around the globe are challenged with rapidly identifying reasonable diagnostic, monitoring and anticoagulant strategies to safely and effectively manage these patients. Thoughtful use of proven, evidence-based approaches must be carefully balanced with integration of rapidly emerging evidence and growing experience. The goal of this document is to provide guidance from the Anticoagulation Forum, a North American organization of anticoagulation providers, regarding use of anticoagulant therapies in patients with COVID-19. We discuss in-hospital and post-discharge venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, treatment of suspected but unconfirmed VTE, laboratory monitoring of COVID-19, associated anticoagulant therapies, and essential elements for optimized transitions of care specific to patients with COVID-19

Risk Levels and Adverse Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Receiving Oral Anticoagulants

IMPORTANCE: The CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score (calculated as congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years and older, diabetes, stroke or TIA, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) is the standard for assessing risk of stroke and systemic embolism and includes age and thromboembolic history. To our knowledge, no studies have comprehensively evaluated safety and effectiveness outcomes among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulants according to independent, categorical risk strata. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence of key adverse outcomes among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulants by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc risk score range, thromboembolic event history, and age group. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study was a retrospective claims data analysis using combined data sets from 5 large health claims databases. Eligible participants were adult patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who initiated oral anticoagulants. Data were analyzed between January 2012 and June 2019. EXPOSURE: Initiation of oral anticoagulants. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We observed clinical outcomes (including stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and a composite outcome) on treatment through study end, censoring for discontinuation of oral anticoagulants, death, and insurance disenrollment. The population was stratified by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc risk score; history of stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack; and age groups. We calculated time to event, incidence rates, and cumulative incidence for outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 1 141 097 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; the mean (SD) age was 75.0 (10.5) years, 608 127 patients (53.3%) were men, and over 1 million were placed in the 2 highest risk categories (high risk 1, 327 766 participants; high risk 2, 688 449 participants). Deyo-Charlson Comorbidity Index scores ranged progressively alongside CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc risk score strata (mean [SD] scores: low risk, 0.4 [1.0]; high risk 2, 4.1 [2.9]). The crude incidence of stroke and systemic embolism generally progressed alongside risk score strata (low risk, 0.25 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 0.18-0.34 events]; high risk 2, 3.43 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 3.06-4.20 events]); patients at the second-highest risk strata with thromboembolic event history had higher stroke incidence vs patients at the highest risk score strata without event history (2.06 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 2.00-3.12 events] vs 1.18 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 1.14-1.30 events]). Major bleeding and composite incidence also increased progressively alongside risk score strata (major bleeding: low risk, 0.68 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 0.56-0.82 events]; high risk 2, 6.29 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 6.21-6.62 events]; composite incidence: 1.22 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 1.06-1.41 events]; high risk 2, 10.67 events per 100 person-years [95% CI, 10.26-11.48 events]). The 12-month cumulative incidence proportions for stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and composite outcomes progressed alongside risk score strata (stroke or systemic embolism, 0.30%-1.85%; major bleeding, 0.55%-5.55%; composite, 1.05%-8.23%). Age subgroup analysis followed similar trends. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The observed incidence of stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding events generally conformed to an expected increasing incidence by risk score, adding insight into the importance of specific risk score range, thromboembolic event history, and age group strata. These results can help inform clinical decision-making, research, and policy

Practical considerations in the use of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a highly prevalent cardiac arrhythmia associated with an increased risk of stroke. The role of anticoagulation therapy in the prevention of thrombosis and stroke is of critical importance for patients with AF. Limitations with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), the current standard of care, have led to the development of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) that target either thrombin (dabigatran etexilate) or activated factor X (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban). In comparison with traditional VKAs such as warfarin, these NOACs offer several pharmacologic advantages, including rapid onset of action, no significant food interactions, low potential for drug-drug interactions, and no requirement for routine coagulation monitoring. Completed phase-III clinical trials have demonstrated the therapeutic potential of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban in comparison with warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular AF (NVAF). While the future utility of NOACs in preventing stroke in patients with NVAF looks promising, several practical issues, including the current lack of a reversal strategy and use of these agents in older patients with renal dysfunction, must be considered. Clinician and patient understanding of such issues will be important for the safe and effective use of NOACs