Oral anticoagulation management in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device implantation.

Eric Black-Maier, Sunghee Kim, Benjamin A Steinberg, Gregg C Fonarow, James V Freeman, Peter R Kowey, Jack Ansell, Bernard J Gersh, Kenneth W Mahaffey, Gerald Naccarelli, Elaine M Hylek, Alan S Go, Eric D Peterson, Jonathan P Piccini

Journal: Clinical cardiology 2018;40(9):746-751

PMID: 28543401

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is associated with increased periprocedural risks after cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. Patterns of anticoagulation management involving non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have not been characterized.

HYPOTHESIS

Anticoagulation strategies and outcomes differ by anticoagulant type in patients undergoing CIED implantation.

METHODS

Using the nationwide Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, we assessed how atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing CIED implantation were cared for and their subsequent outcomes. Outcomes were compared by oral anticoagulant therapy (none, warfarin, or NOAC) as well as by anticoagulation interruption status.

RESULTS

Among 9129 AF patients, 416 (5%) underwent CIED implantation during a median follow-up of 30 months (interquartile range, 24-36). Of these, 60 (14%) had implantation on a NOAC. Relative to warfarin therapy, those on a NOAC were younger (70.5 years [range, 65-77.5 years] vs 77 years [range, 70-82 years]), had less valvular heart disease (15.0% vs 31.3%), higher creatinine clearance (67.3 [range, 59.7-99.0] vs 65.8 [range, 50.0-91.6]), were more likely to have persistent AF (26.7% vs 22.9%), and use concomitant aspirin (51.7% vs 35.2%). OAC therapy was commonly interrupted for CIED in 64% (n = 183 of 284) of warfarin patients and 65% (n = 39 of 60) of NOAC patients. Many interrupted patients received intravenous bridging anticoagulation: 33/183 (18%) interrupted warfarin and 4/39 (10%) interrupted NOAC patients. Thirty-day periprocedure bleeding and stroke adverse events were infrequent.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of anticoagulation among AF patients undergoing CIED implantation is highly variable, with OAC being interrupted in more than half of both warfarin- and NOAC-treated patients. Bleeding and stroke events were infrequent in both warfarin and NOAC-treated patients.

© 2017 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Address: Cardiac Electrophysiology Section, Duke Center for Atrial Fibrillation, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.; Cardiac Electrophysiology Section, Duke Center for Atrial Fibrillation, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.; Division of Cardiology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.; Department of Cardiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.; Department of Cardiology, Lankenau Hospital and Medical Research Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.; Department of Cardiology, New York University School of Medicine, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York.; Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.; Department of Cardiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.; Department of Cardiology, Penn State University School of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania.; Department of Cardiology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.; Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.