CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

OPTIMAL USE OF LIPID-LOWERING THERAPY AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES: A Position Paper endorsed by the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP) Risk Factors Associated With Major Cardiovascular Events 1 Year After Acute Myocardial Infarction Comparison of the Preventive Efficacy of Rosuvastatin Versus Atorvastatin in Post-Contrast Acute Kidney Injury in Patients With ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Editor's Choice- Impact of immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention on 1-year outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial Intravenous Statin Administration During Myocardial Infarction Compared With Oral Post-Infarct Administration New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial High-Sensitivity Troponin and The Application of Risk Stratification Thresholds in Patients with Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome The prognostic role of mid-range ejection fraction in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Clinical TrialVolume 72, Issue 1, July 2018

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Risk of Myocardial Infarction in Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

C J-Y Lee, TA Gerds, N Carlson et al. Keywords: apixaban; dabigatran; direct oral anticoagulant; rivaroxaban; vitamin K antagonist

Abstract


BACKGROUND - Evidence is conflicting as to the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) and vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for prevention of myocardial infarction (MI).

OBJECTIVES - This study aimed to investigate the risk of MI associated with the use of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and VKA in patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS - Patients with atrial fibrillation were identified using Danish health care registers and stratified by initial oral anticoagulant treatment. Standardized absolute 1-year risks were estimated based on Cox regression for hazard rates of MI hospitalizations and mortality. Reported were absolute risks separately for the oral anticoagulation treatments and standardized to the characteristics of the study population.

RESULTS - Of the 31,739 patients included (median age, 74 years; 47% females), the standardized 1-year risk of MI for VKA was 1.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3 to 1.8), apixaban was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.9 to 1.4), dabigatran was 1.2% (95% CI: 1.0 to 1.5), and rivaroxaban was 1.1% (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.3). No significant risk differences were observed in the standardized 1-year risks of MI among the DOACs: dabigatran versus apixaban (0.04%; 95% CI: −0.3 to 0.4), rivaroxaban versus apixaban (0.1%; 95% CI: −0.4 to 0.3), and rivaroxaban versus dabigatran (−0.1%; 95% CI: −0.5 to 0.2). The risk differences for DOACs versus VKA were all significant: −0.4% (95% CI: −0.7 to −0.1) for apixaban, −0.4% (95% CI: −0.7 to −0.03) for dabigatran, and −0.5% (95% CI: −0.8 to −0.2) for rivaroxaban.

CONCLUSIONS - No significant risk differences of MI were found in the direct comparisons of DOACs, and DOACs were all associated with a significant risk reduction of MI compared with VKA.