4.6 Article

Incidence of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation and advanced liver fibrosis on treatment with vitamin K or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 264, 期 -, 页码 58-63

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.01.097

关键词

Atrial fibrillation; Liver fibrosis; Bleeding; Vitamin K antagonists; NOAC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: To investigate the incidence of bleeding events in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients treated with vitamin K (VKAs) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) screened for the presence of liver fibrosis (LF). Background: Previous studies provided conflicting results on bleeding risk in AF patients with liver disease on VKAs, and no data on NOACs in this setting are available. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of a prospective, observational multicentre study including 2330 AF outpatients treated with VKAs (n = 1297) or NOACs (n = 1033). Liver damage was quantified by the FIB-4 score (>3.25), a validated marker of LF. The primary endpoint was the incidence of any bleeding, according to ISTH classification. Results: A high FIB-4 was present in 129 (5.5%) patients: 77 (5.9%) on VKA and 52 (5.0%) on NOACs (p = 0.344). During follow-up, 357 (15.3%) patients experienced a bleeding: 261 (80 major and 180 minor) with VKAs (7.2%/year), and 96 (40 major and 56 minor) with NOACs (6.4%/year). In VKA-treated patients, but not in those on NOACs, FIB-4 >3.25 was associated with higher major bleeding (14.3% vs. 5.6%, log-rank test p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression model showed that FIB-4 was associated with major bleeding only in VKA-treated patients (HR: 3.075, 95% CI 1.626-5.818, p = 0.001). On multivariable analysis, FIB-4 was not significantly associated with CVEs neither in VKA or NOAC-treated patients. Conclusion: We found a significant association between LF and major bleedings in AF patients treated with VKA, which was not evident in patients on NOACs. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据