CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

MR-proADM as a Prognostic Marker in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction-DANAMI-3 (a Danish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With STEMI) Substudy Recommendations for Institutions Transitioning to High-Sensitivity Troponin Testing JACC Scientific Expert Panel Efficacy and Safety of Stents in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Prognostic and Practical Validation of Current Definitions of Myocardial Infarction Associated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial Decreased inspired oxygen stimulates de novo formation of coronary collaterals in adult heart

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.