A recent study by Brian Mac Grory and colleagues investigated the safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) among patients under vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) use within 7 days prior to hospital admission. Through this retrospective, observational cohort study, they found prior VKA use did not increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) overall. However, recent VKA use with a presenting international normalized ratio (INR) > 1.7 was associated with a significantly increased risk of sICH. Future large-scale randomized controlled trials should be conducted to further clarify the effects and feasibility of EVT therapy in ischemic stroke patients under anticoagulation.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have become the preferred option for treatment of venous thromboembolism due to their favorable profile compared with other agents such as vitamin K antagonists or low-molecular-weight heparin. However, findings from randomized controlled trials suggest efficacy and/or safety concerns with DOAC use in some clinical contexts. This illustrated review will summarize indications where DOACs have proven efficacy and safety, situations where they fall short, and situations where uncertainty remains compared with other treatments for venous thromboembolism.

UNASSIGNED: Recent guidelines suggest that antiplatelet therapy (APT) is the standard of care in the absence of long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) indications in patients post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The superiority of one method over the other remains controversial.
UNASSIGNED: Several databases, including MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and EMBASE, were electronically searched. The primary endpoint was the all-cause mortality (ACM) rate. Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke/TIA, haemorrhagic stroke, bleeding events, systemic embolism, and valve thrombosis in post-TAVR patients receiving APT and oral anticoagulants (OACs). Forest plots were generated using Review Manager version 5.4, with a p value less than 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity.
UNASSIGNED: Twelve studies were selected. No significant differences were observed in APT and OAC group for ACM [risk ratio (RR): 0.67; 95% CI:0.45-1.01; P=0.05], cardiovascular death [RR:0.91; 95% CI:0.73-1.14; P=0.42], MI [RR:1.69; 95% CI:0.43-6.72; P=0.46], Stroke/TIA [RR:0.79; 95% CI:0.58-1.06; P=0.12], ischaemic stroke [RR:0.83; 95% CI:0.50-1.37; P=0.47], haemorrhagic stroke [RR:1.08; 95% CI: 0.23-5.15; P=0.92], major bleeding [RR:0.79; 95% CI:0.51-1.21; P=0.28], minor bleeding [RR:1.09; 95% CI: 0.80-1.47; P=0.58], life-threatening bleeding [RR:0.85; 95% CI:0.55-1.30; P=0.45], any bleeding [RR:0.98; 95% CI:0.83-1.15; P=0.78], and systemic embolism [RR:0.87; 95% CI:0.44-1.70; P=0.68]. The risk of valve thrombosis was higher in patients receiving APT than in those receiving OAC [RR:2.61; 95% CI:1.56-4.36; P =0.0002].
UNASSIGNED: Although the risk of valve thrombosis increased in patients receiving APT, the risk of other endpoints was comparable between the two groups.

Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is the primary anticoagulant in most settings of Sub-Saharan Africa. Understanding the quality of anticoagulation services in the continent is vital in optimising the intended benefits. This study assessed the quality of anticoagulation and associated factors among VKA-treated patients in nine SSA countries. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of randomly selected patients on anticoagulation from 20 clinics in Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania, and South Africa. Eligible participants were those on VKAs for at least three months and with at least four international normalised ratios (INR) results in 2019-2021. We report the proportion of INR values in the therapeutic range, time-in-therapeutic range (TTR) using the Rosendaal method, and the proportion of patients with TTR ≥ 65% (optimal anticoagulation). The mean age was 51.1(16.1) years, and 64.2% were women. The most common indications for VKA included venous thromboembolism (29.6%), prosthetic valves (26.7%) and atrial fibrillation/flutter (30.1%). We analysed 6743 INR tests from 1011 participants, and of these, 48.5% were sub-therapeutic, 34.1% therapeutic, and 17.4% were supratherapeutic relative to disease-specific reference ranges. TTR was calculated for 660 patients using 4927 INR measurements. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) TTR was 35.8(15.9,57.2) %. Optimal anticoagulation control was evident in 19.2% of participants, varying from 2.7% in Tanzania to 23.1% in Ethiopia. The proportion of patients with TTR ≥ 65% was 15,4% for prosthetic heart valves, 21.1% for venous thromboembolism and 23.7% for atrial fibrillation or flutter. Countries with universal health coverage had higher odds of optimal anticoagulation control (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15- 2.81, p = 0.01). Patients on VKAs for different therapeutic indications in SSA had suboptimal TTR. Universal health coverage increased the odds of achieving TTR by 79%. The evidence calls for more intensive warfarin management strategies in SSA, including providing VKA services without out-of-pocket payments.

Oral anticoagulants are widely used to treat or prevent cardiovascular diseases in millions of patients worldwide. They are the drugs of choice for stroke prevention and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and prosthetic heart valves, as well as for treatment/prevention of venous thromboembolism. Oral anticoagulants include vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The hemostasis laboratory plays a crucial role in the management of treated patients, spanning from dose adjustment based on laboratory testing that applies to VKAs to the measurement of drug concentrations in special situations that apply to DOACs. This article aims to overview how the hemostasis laboratory can help clinicians manage patients on oral anticoagulants. Special interest is devoted to the international normalized ratio, used to manage patients on VKAs and to the measurement of DOAC concentrations, for which the role of the laboratory is still not very well defined, and most interferences of DOACs with some of the most common hemostatic parameters are not widely appreciated.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in adults. Prevention of the ischaemic risk with oral anticoagulants (OACs) is widely recommended, and current clinical guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as preference therapy for stroke prevention. However, there are currently no clinical practice guidelines or recommendation documents on the optimal management of OACs in patients with AF that specifically address and adapt to the Central American and Caribbean context. The aim of this Delphi-like study is to respond to doubts that may arise in the management of OACs in patients with non-valvular AF in this geographical area. A consensus project was performed on the basis of a systematic review of the literature, a recommended ADOLOPMENT-like approach, and the application of a two-round Delphi survey. In the first round, 31 recommendations were evaluated and 30 reached consensus, of which, 10 unanimously agreed. The study assessed expert opinions in a wide variety of contextualized recommendations for the optimal management of DOACs in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). There is a broad consensus on the clinical practice guideline (CPG) statements used related to anticoagulation indication, patient follow-up, anticoagulation therapy complications, COVID-19 management and prevention, and cardiac interventions.

(1) Background: The clinical management of anticoagulated patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) or Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) needing emergency surgery is challenging. (2) Methods: The prospective German RADOA registry investigated treatment strategies in DOAC- or VKA-treated patients needing emergency surgery within 24 h after admission. Effectiveness was analysed by clinical endpoints including major bleeding. Primary observation endpoint was in hospital mortality until 30 days after admission. (3) Results: A total of 78 patients were included (DOAC: 44; VKA: 34). Median age was 76 years. Overall, 43% of the DOAC patients and 79% of the VKA patients were treated with prothrombin complex concentrates (PCC) (p = 0.002). Out of the DOAC patients, 30% received no hemostatic treatment compared to 3% (1/34) of the VKA patients (p = 0.002), and 7% of the DOAC patients and 21% of the VKA patients developed major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding at the surgical site (p = 0.093). In-hospital mortality was 13% with no significant difference between the two treatment groups (DOAC: 11%, VKA: 15%; p > 0.20). (4) Conclusions: The 30-day in-hospital mortality rate was comparable between both patient groups. VKA patients required significantly more hemostatic agents than DOAC patients in the peri- and postoperative surgery period.

In Asia, especially Vietnam, AF is a common arrhythmia and is linked to a higher risk of stroke and systemic embolism. Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in AF patients can result in bleeding complications. To effectively manage AF, adopting appropriate anticoagulation and addressing modifiable risk factors are crucial. Vietnamese clinicians are particularly interested in non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), a recent development in AF treatment. However, the lack of head-to-head trials comparing NOACs makes selecting a specific NOAC challenging. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the available clinical evidence on NOACs for stroke prevention in AF to assist clinicians in making informed decisions and improving treatment outcomes in patients with AF. The first part of this review will present the current landscape of AF in Vietnam, focusing on AF prevalence and highlighting gaps in clinical practice. Furthermore, this part extensively discusses the anticoagulation strategy for both primary and secondary stroke prevention in AF.

BACKGROUND: The benefit-risk profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) therapy in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and atrial fibrillation (AF) has not been well established yet. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOAC compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with HCM and AF.
METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched to identify studies comparing DOAC with VKA in patients with HCM and AF. The primary endpoint was thromboembolic events. The relative risks and standard errors were pooled by random-effect models using the generic inverse variance method.
RESULTS: Seven observational studies involving 9395 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to the VKA group, the DOAC group displayed a similar risk of thromboembolic events [RR (95%CI): 0.93 (0.73-1.20), p = 0.59] and ischemic stroke [RR (95%CI): 0.65 (0.33-1.28), p = 0.22]. The incidence of major bleeding was comparable between the two groups [RR (95%CI): 0.75 (0.49-1.15), p = 0.19]. Meanwhile, DOAC therapy was superior to VKA therapy in reducing the incidences of all-cause death [RR (95%CI): 0.44 (0.35-0.55), p < 0.001], cardiovascular death [RR (95%CI): 0.41 (0.22-0.75), p = 0.004], and intracranial hemorrhage [RR (95%CI): 0.42 (0.24-0.74), p = 0.003].
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HCM and AF, DOAC therapy was similar to VKA therapy in reducing the risk of thromboembolic events, without increasing bleeding risk. In addition, the DOAC group displayed significant advantages in reducing mortality and intracranial hemorrhage compared with the VKA group. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to provide more evidence for DOAC therapy in this population.

UNASSIGNED: Current observational studies have compared the effectiveness and safety of edoxaban with other oral anticoagulants in patients with AF, but the results are still disputed. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effect of edoxaban in patients with AF.
UNASSIGNED: We performed systematic research from the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until November 2022 to obtain relevant observational studies. Adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were collected and pooled by a random-effects model. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022314222).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 17 observational studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, edoxaban was associated with lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism (RR = 0.67, 95 % CI:0.61-0.74), major bleeding (RR = 0.54, 95 % CI:0.44-0.67), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR = 0.51, 95 % CI:0.29-0.90). Compared with dabigatran or rivaroxaban, edoxaban was associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism (dabigatran [RR = 0.76, 95 % CI:0.66-0.87]; rivaroxaban [RR = 0.81, 95 % CI:0.70-0.94]) and major bleeding (dabigatran [RR = 0.82, 95 % CI:0.69-0.98]; rivaroxaban [RR = 0.81, 95 % CI:0.70-0.94]). Compared with apixaban, edoxaban was associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism (RR = 0.87, 95 % CI:0.79-0.97), but had similar risks of bleeding events.
UNASSIGNED: Our current evidence suggested that edoxaban might have superior effectiveness and/or safety outcomes than vitamin K antagonists, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban for stroke prevention in patients with AF.