4.5 Review

Thrombo-embolism and antithrombotic therapy for heart failure in sinus rhythm. A Joint Consensus Document from the ESC Heart Failure Association and the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages 681-695

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1093/eurjhf/hfs073

Keywords

Heart failure; Sinus rhythm; Thrombo-embolism; Antithrombotic therapy; Warfarin; Aspirin

Funding

  1. Bayer
  2. NIH
  3. Boston Scientific
  4. Astra-Zeneca
  5. Sanofi
  6. Boehringer Ingelheim
  7. Bayer Healthcare
  8. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  9. Daiichi Sankyo
  10. Lilly
  11. BMS
  12. Eli-Lilly
  13. Merck
  14. Medicines Company
  15. Pfizer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic heart failure (HF) with either reduced or preserved ejection fraction is common and remains an extremely serious disorder with a high mortality and morbidity. Many complications related to HF can be related to thrombosis. Epidemiological and pathophysiological data also link HF to an increased risk of thrombosis, leading to the clinical consequences of sudden death, stroke, systemic thrombo-embolism, and/or venous thrombo-embolism. This consensus document of the Heart Failure Association (EHFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis reviews the published evidence and summarizes obest practice', and puts forward consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist management decisions in everyday clinical practice. In HF patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation is recommended, and the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc and HAS-BLED scores should be used to determine the likely riskbenefit ratio (thrombo-embolism prevention vs. risk of bleeding) of oral anticoagulation. In HF patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction who are in sinus rhythm there is no evidence of an overall benefit of vitamin K antagonists (e.g. warfarin) on mortality, with risk of major bleeding. Despite the potential for a reduction in ischaemic stroke, there is currently no compelling reason to use warfarin routinely for these patients. Risk factors associated with increased risk of thrombo-embolic events should be identified and decisions regarding use of anticoagulation individualized. Patient values and preferences are important determinants when balancing the risk of thrombo-embolism against bleeding risk. New oral anticoagulants that offer a different riskbenefit profile compared with warfarin may appear as an attractive therapeutic option, but this would need to be confirmed in clinical trials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available