David Fitzmaurice

Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

Non-thrombotic PE does not represent a distinct clinical syndrome. It may be due to a variety of embolic materials and result in a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, making the diagnosis difficult. With the exception of severe air and fat embolism, the haemodynamic consequences of non-thrombotic emboli are usually mild. Treatment is mostly supportive but may differ according to the type of embolic material and clinical severity.

Warfarin versus aspirin for stroke prevention in an elderly community population with atrial fibrillation (the Birmingham Atrial Fibrillation Treatment of the Aged Study, BAFTA): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Anticoagulants are more effective than antiplatelet agents at reducing stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, but whether this benefit outweighs the increased risk of bleeding in elderly patients is unknown. We assessed whether warfarin reduced risk of major stroke, arterial embolism, or other intracranial haemorrhage compared with aspirin in elderly patients. METHODS 973 patients aged 75 years or over (mean age 81.5 years, SD 4.2) with atrial fibrillation were recruited from primary care and randomly assigned to warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2-3) or aspirin (75 mg per day). Follow-up was for a mean of 2.7 years (SD 1.2). The primary endpoint was fatal or disabling stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic), intracranial haemorrhage, or clinically significant arterial embolism. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN89345269. FINDINGS There were 24 primary events (21 strokes, two other intracranial haemorrhages, and one systemic embolus) in people assigned to warfarin and 48 primary events (44 strokes, one other intracranial haemorrhage, and three systemic emboli) in people assigned to aspirin (yearly risk 1.8%vs 3.8%, relative risk 0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.80, p=0.003; absolute yearly risk reduction 2%, 95% CI 0.7-3.2). Yearly risk of extracranial haemorrhage was 1.4% (warfarin) versus 1.6% (aspirin) (relative risk 0.87, 0.43-1.73; absolute risk reduction 0.2%, -0.7 to 1.2). INTERPRETATION These data support the use of anticoagulation therapy for people aged over 75 who have atrial fibrillation, unless there are contraindications or the patient decides that the benefits are not worth the inconvenience.

Risk Profiles and Antithrombotic Treatment of Patients Newly Diagnosed with Atrial Fibrillation at Risk of Stroke: Perspectives from the International, Observational, Prospective GARFIELD Registry

Background Limited data are available on the characteristics, clinical management, and outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke, from a worldwide perspective. The aim of this study was to describe the baseline characteristics and initial therapeutic management of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across the spectrum of sites at which these patients are treated. Methods and Findings The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD) is an observational study of patients newly diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Enrollment into Cohort 1 (of 5) took place between December 2009 and October 2011 at 540 sites in 19 countries in Europe, Asia-Pacific, Central/South America, and Canada. Investigator sites are representative of the distribution of atrial fibrillation care settings in each country. Cohort 1 comprised 10,614 adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation within the previous 6 weeks, with ≥1 investigator-defined stroke risk factor (not limited to those in existing risk-stratification schemes), and regardless of therapy. Data collected at baseline included demographics, medical history, care setting, nature of atrial fibrillation, and treatments initiated at diagnosis. The mean (SD) age of the population was 70.2 (11.2) years; 43.2% were women. Mean±SD CHADS2 score was 1.9±1.2, and 57.2% had a score ≥2. Mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.2±1.6, and 8,957 (84.4%) had a score ≥2. Overall, 38.0% of patients with a CHADS2 score ≥2 did not receive anticoagulant therapy, whereas 42.5% of those at low risk (score 0) received anticoagulant therapy. Conclusions These contemporary observational worldwide data on non-valvular atrial fibrillation, collected at the end of the vitamin K antagonist-only era, indicate that these drugs are frequently not being used according to stroke risk scores and guidelines, with overuse in patients at low risk and underuse in those at high risk of stroke. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov TRI08888

Screening versus routine practice in detection of atrial fibrillation in patients aged 65 or over: cluster randomised controlled trial

Objectives To assess whether screening improves the detection of atrial fibrillation (cluster randomisation) and to compare systematic and opportunistic screening. Design Multicentred cluster randomised controlled trial, with subsidiary trial embedded within the intervention arm. Setting 50 primary care centres in England, with further individual randomisation of patients in the intervention practices. Participants 14 802 patients aged 65 or over in 25 intervention and 25 control practices. Interventions Patients in intervention practices were randomly allocated to systematic screening (invitation for electrocardiography) or opportunistic screening (pulse taking and invitation for electrocardiography if the pulse was irregular). Screening took place over 12 months in each practice from October 2001 to February 2003. No active screening took place in control practices. Main outcome measure Newly identified atrial fibrillation. Results The detection rate of new cases of atrial fibrillation was 1.63% a year in the intervention practices and 1.04% in control practices (difference 0.59%, 95% confidence interval 0.20% to 0.98%). Systematic and opportunistic screening detected similar numbers of new cases (1.62% v 1.64%, difference 0.02%, −0.5% to 0.5%). Conclusion Active screening for atrial fibrillation detects additional cases over current practice. The preferred method of screening in patients aged 65 or over in primary care is opportunistic pulse taking with follow-up electrocardiography. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19633732.

Self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND Uptake of self-testing and self-management of oral anticoagulation [corrected] has remained inconsistent, despite good evidence of their effectiveness. To clarify the value of self-monitoring of oral anticoagulation, we did a meta-analysis of individual patient data addressing several important gaps in the evidence, including an estimate of the effect on time to death, first major haemorrhage, and thromboembolism. METHODS We searched Ovid versions of Embase (1980-2009) and Medline (1966-2009), limiting searches to randomised trials with a maximally sensitive strategy. We approached all authors of included trials and requested individual patient data: primary outcomes were time to death, first major haemorrhage, and first thromboembolic event. We did prespecified subgroup analyses according to age, type of control-group care (anticoagulation-clinic care vs primary care), self-testing alone versus self-management, and sex. We analysed patients with mechanical heart valves or atrial fibrillation separately. We used a random-effect model method to calculate pooled hazard ratios and did tests for interaction and heterogeneity, and calculated a time-specific number needed to treat. FINDINGS Of 1357 abstracts, we included 11 trials with data for 6417 participants and 12,800 person-years of follow-up. We reported a significant reduction in thromboembolic events in the self-monitoring group (hazard ratio 0·51; 95% CI 0·31-0·85) but not for major haemorrhagic events (0·88, 0·74-1·06) or death (0·82, 0·62-1·09). Participants younger than 55 years showed a striking reduction in thrombotic events (hazard ratio 0·33, 95% CI 0·17-0·66), as did participants with mechanical heart valve (0·52, 0·35-0·77). Analysis of major outcomes in the very elderly (age ≥85 years, n=99) showed no significant adverse effects of the intervention for all outcomes. INTERPRETATION Our analysis showed that self-monitoring and self-management of oral coagulation is a safe option for suitable patients of all ages. Patients should also be offered the option to self-manage their disease with suitable health-care support as back-up. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Technology Assessment Programme, UK NIHR National School for Primary Care Research.

Bleeding risks of antithrombotic therapy

Many of the common cardiovascular disorders (especially in elderly people) are linked to thrombosis—such as ischaemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, valve disease, hypertension, and atherosclerotic vascular disease—requiring the use of antithrombotic therapy. This raises questions regarding the appropriate use of antithrombotic therapy in older people, especially because strategies such as anticoagulation with warfarin need regular monitoring of the international normalised ratio (INR), a measure of the induced haemorrhagic tendency, and carry a risk of bleeding. The presence of concomitant physical and medical problems increases the interactions and risks associated with warfarin, and anticoagulation in elderly patients often needs an assessment of the overall risk:benefit ratio. #### Questions to ask when considering oral anticoagulation ![][1] ISI=international sensitivity ratio. The mean normal prothrombin time is often generated from samples from local healthy subjects or a commercially available standard. The exact value of the ISI depends on the thromboplastin used in the prothrombin time method Physical frailty in elderly people may reduce access to anticoagulant clinics for INR monitoring. The decline in cognitive function in some elderly patients also may reduce compliance with anticoagulation and the appreciation of bleeding risks and drug interactions. However, in recent studies of anticoagulation in elderly people, no significant associations of anticoagulant control were found with age, sex, social circumstances, mobility, domicillary supervision of medication, or indications for anticoagulation. Bleeding is the most serious and common complication of warfarin treatment. For any given patient, the potential benefit from prevention of … [1]: /embed/graphic-1.gif

Self management of oral anticoagulation: randomised trial

Abstract Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of self management compared with routine care in patients on long term oral anticoagulants. Design Multicentre open randomised controlled trial. Setting Midlands region of the UK. Participants 617 patients aged over 18 and receiving warfarin randomised to intervention (n = 337) and routine care (n = from 2470 invited; 193/337 (57%) completed the 12 month intervention. Intervention Intervention patients used a point of care device to measure international normalised ratio twice a week and a simple dosing chart to interpret their dose of warfarin. Main outcome measure Percentage of time spent within the therapeutic range of international normalised ratio. Results No significant differences were found in percentage of time in the therapeutic range between self managment and routine care (70% v 68%). Self managed patients with poor control before the study showed an improvement in control that was not seen in the routine care group. Nine patients (2.8/100 patient years) had serious adverse events in the self managed group, compared with seven (2.7/100 patient years) in the routine care arm (χ2(df = 1) = 0.02, P = 0.89). Conclusion With appropriate training, self management is safe and reliable for a sizeable proportion of patients receiving oral anticoagulation treatment. It may improve the time spent the therapeutic range for patients with initially poor control. Trial registration ISRCTN 19313375.

International longitudinal registry of patients with atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke: Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD (GARFIELD)

BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Patients with AF carry a fivefold increased risk of stroke and the risk of death from AF-related stroke is doubled. Current management is often inadequate, leaving patients at risk for a potentially fatal or disabling event. The purpose of the GARFIELD registry is to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular AF at risk for stroke. DESIGN The GARFIELD registry is an observational, multicenter, prospective study of patients with newly diagnosed AF and one or more additional risk factors for stroke. The aim is to enroll 55,000 patients at >1,000 centers in 50 countries. Enrollment will take place in five independent, sequential, prospective cohorts. An additional retrospective validation cohort of 5,000 patients with established AF and at least one additional risk factor for stroke will be conducted in parallel with cohort one. The study started in December 2009, with a planned recruitment period of 4 years and a minimum of 2-year follow-up for each patient. SUMMARY The GARFIELD registry will provide valuable insights into the clinical management and related outcomes of AF patients throughout many regions of the world and across the spectrum of healthcare systems. By capturing data from unselected patients treated in everyday practice, the registry has the potential to identify best practices as well as deficiencies in available treatment options for specific patient populations and to describe how therapeutic strategies, patient care, and outcomes will evolve over time.

Point-of-care testing in haemostasis.

Point‐of‐care testing (POCT) in haematology has seen a significant increase in both the spectrum of tests available and the number of tests performed annually. POCT is frequently undertaken with the belief that this will reduce the turnaround time for results and so improve patient care. The most obvious example of POCT in haemostasis is the out‐of‐hospital monitoring of the International Normalized Ratio in patients receiving a vitamin K antagonist, such as warfarin. Other areas include the use of the Activated Clotting Time to monitor anticoagulation for patients on cardio‐pulmonary bypass, platelet function testing to identify patients with apparent aspirin or clopidogrel resistance and thrombelastography to guide blood product replacement during cardiac and hepatic surgery. In contrast to laboratory testing, POCT is frequently undertaken by untrained or semi‐trained individuals and in many cases is not subject to the same strict quality control programmes that exist in the central laboratory. Although external quality assessment programmes do exist for some POCT assays these are still relatively few. The use of POCT in haematology, particularly in the field of haemostasis, is likely to expand and it is important that systems are in place to ensure that the generated results are accurate and precise.

A randomised controlled trial of patient self management of oral anticoagulation treatment compared with primary care management

Background: The increase in numbers of patients receiving warfarin treatment has led to the development of alternative models of service delivery for oral anticoagulant monitoring. Patient self management for oral anticoagulation is a model new to the UK. This randomised trial was the first to compare routine primary care management of oral anticoagulation with patient self management. Aim: To test whether patient self management is as safe, in terms of clinical effectiveness, as primary care management within the UK, as assessed by therapeutic international normalised ratio (INR) control. Method: Patients receiving warfarin from six general practices who satisfied study entry criteria were eligible to enter the study. Eligible patients were randomised to either intervention (patient self management) or control (routine primary care management) for six months. The intervention comprised two training sessions of one to two hours duration. Patients were allowed to undertake patient self management on successful completion of training. INR testing was undertaken using a Coaguchek device and regular internal/external quality control tests were performed. Patients were advised to perform INR tests every two weeks, or weekly if a dose adjustment was made. Dosage adjustment was undertaken using a simple dosing algorithm. Results: Seventy eight of 206 (38%) patients were eligible for inclusion and, of these, 35 (45%) declined involvement or withdrew from the study. Altogether, 23 intervention and 26 control patients entered the study. There were no significant differences in INR control (per cent time in range: intervention, 74%; control, 77%). There were no serious adverse events in the intervention group, with one fatal retroperitoneal haemorrhage in the control group. Costs of patient self management were significantly greater than for routine care (£90 v £425/patient/year). Conclusion: These are the first UK data to demonstrate that patient self management is as safe as primary care management for a selected population. Further studies are needed to elucidate whether this model of care is suitable for a larger population.