Henrik Renlund

Safety and efficacy of well managed warfarin: A report from the Swedish quality register Auricula

The safety and efficacy of warfarin in a large, unselected cohort of warfarin-treated patients with high quality of care is comparable to that reported for non-vitamin K antagonists. Warfarin is commonly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, as well as for treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism. While reducing risk of thrombotic/embolic incidents, warfarin increases the risk of bleeding. The aim of this study was to elucidate risks of bleeding and thromboembolism for patients on warfarin treatment in a large, unselected cohort with rigorously controlled treatment. This was a retrospective, registry-based study, covering all patients treated with warfarin in the Swedish national anticoagulation register Auricula, which records both primary and specialised care. The study included 77,423 unselected patients with 100,952 treatment periods of warfarin, constituting 217,804 treatment years. Study period was January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2011. Atrial fibrillation was the most common indication (68 %). The mean time in therapeutic range of the international normalised ratio (INR) 2.0-3.0 was 76.5 %. The annual incidence of severe bleeding was 2.24 % and of thromboembolism 2.65 %. The incidence of intracranial bleeding was 0.37 % per treatment year in the whole population, and 0.38 % among patients with atrial fibrillation. In conclusion, warfarin treatment where patients spend a high proportion of time in the therapeutic range is safe and effective, and will continue to be a valid treatment option in the era of newer oral anticoagulants.

Outcomes in a Warfarin-Treated Population With Atrial Fibrillation

IMPORTANCE Vitamin K antagonist (eg, warfarin) use is nowadays challenged by the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF). NOAC studies were based on comparisons with warfarin arms with times in therapeutic range (TTRs) of 55.2% to 64.9%, making the results less credible in health care systems with higher TTRs. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy and safety of well-managed warfarin therapy in patients with nonvalvular AF, the risk of complications, especially intracranial bleeding, in patients with concomitant use of aspirin, and the impact of international normalized ratio (INR) control. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective, multicenter cohort study based on Swedish registries, especially AuriculA, a quality register for AF and oral anticoagulation, was conducted. The register contains nationwide data, including that from specialized anticoagulation clinics and primary health care centers. A total of 40 449 patients starting warfarin therapy owing to nonvalvular AF during the study period were monitored until treatment cessation, death, or the end of the study. The study was conducted from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2011, and data were analyzed between February 1 and November 15, 2015. Associating complications with risk factors and individual INR control, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of warfarin treatment in patients with concomitant aspirin therapy and those with no additional antiplatelet medications. EXPOSURES Use of warfarin with and without concomitant therapy with aspirin. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Annual incidence of complications in association with individual TTR (iTTR), INR variability, and aspirin use and identification of factors indicating the probability of intracranial bleeding. RESULTS Of the 40 449 patients included in the study, 16 201 (40.0%) were women; mean (SD) age of the cohort was 72.5 (10.1) years, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc (cardiac failure or dysfunction, hypertension, age ≥75 years [doubled], diabetes mellitus, stroke [doubled]-vascular disease, age 65-74 years, and sex category [female]) score was 3.3 at baseline. The annual incidence, reported as percentage (95% CI) of all-cause mortality was 2.19% (2.07-2.31) and, for intracranial bleeding, 0.44% (0.39-0.49). Patients receiving concomitant aspirin had annual rates of any major bleeding of 3.07% (2.70-3.44) and thromboembolism of 4.90% (4.43-5.37), and those with renal failure were at higher risk of intracranial bleeding (hazard ratio, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.32-3.82). Annual rates of any major bleeding and any thromboembolism in iTTR less than 70% were 3.81% (3.51-4.11) and 4.41% (4.09-4.73), respectively, and, in high INR variability, were 3.04% (2.85-3.24) and 3.48% (3.27-3.69), respectively. For patients with iTTR 70% or greater, the level of INR variability did not alter event rates. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Well-managed warfarin therapy is associated with a low risk of complications and is still a valid alternative for prophylaxis of AF-associated stroke. Therapy should be closely monitored for patients with renal failure, concomitant aspirin use, and poor INR control.

Outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel after acute myocardial infarction: experiences from SWEDEHEART registry.

AIMS Ticagrelor reduces ischaemic events and mortality in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) vs. clopidogrel. We wished to study clinical outcomes in a large real-world population post-ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS We performed a prospective cohort study in 45 073 ACS patients enrolled into Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies who were discharged on ticagrelor (N = 11 954) or clopidogrel (N = 33 119) between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2013. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, re-admission with myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, secondary outcomes as the individual components of the primary outcome, and re-admission with bleeding. The risk of the primary outcome with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel was 11.7 vs. 22.3% (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.85 [95% confidence interval: 0.78-0.93]), risk of death 5.8 vs. 12.9% (adjusted HR 0.83 [0.75-0.92]), and risk of MI 6.1 vs. 10.8% (adjusted HR 0.89 [0.78-1.01]) at 24 months. Re-admission with bleeding with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel occurred in 5.5 vs. 5.2% (adjusted HR 1.20 [1.04-1.40]). In a subset of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel the PCI-related in-hospital bleeding was 3.7 vs. 2.7% (adjusted odds ratio, OR, 1.57 [1.30-1.90]). CONCLUSION Ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel post-ACS was associated with a lower risk of death, MI, or stroke, as well as death alone. Risk of bleeding was higher with ticagrelor. These real-world outcomes are consistent with randomized trial results.

Thrombus Aspiration in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction : An Individual Patient Meta-analysis

Background: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. Results: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.01; P=0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98–2.10; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.98; P=0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–2.42, P=0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. Conclusions: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. Clinical Trial Registration: URLs: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifiers: NCT02552407 and CRD42015025936.Background: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. Results: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.01; P =0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98–2.10; P =0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.98; P =0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–2.42, P =0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. Conclusions: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. Clinical Trial Registration: URLs: . Unique identifiers: [NCT02552407][1] and CRD42015025936. # Clinical Perspective {#article-title-14} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT02552407&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F135%2F2%2F143.atomBACKGROUND—: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with STEMI. METHODS—: Included were large (N≥1000) randomized controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy vs. PCI alone in patients with STEMI. Individual patient data was provided by the leadership of each trial. The pre-specified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular (CV) mortality within 30 days and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) within 30 days. RESULTS—: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS, TASTE and TOTAL) enrolled 19,047 patients, of whom 18,306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. CV death at 30 days occurred in 221 (2.4%) of 9155 patients randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 (2.9%) of 9151 randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; 95% CI 0.70-1.01, p=0.06). Stroke or TIA occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio [OR] 1.43 95% CI 0.98-2.1, p=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI thrombus grade ≥3) thrombus aspiration was associated with less CV death (170 [2.5%] vs. 205 [3.1%] HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65-0.98, p =0.03), and with more stroke or TIA (55 [0.9%] vs. 34 [0.5%] OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.02-2.42, p=0.04). However, the interaction p-values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS—: Routine thrombus aspiration during STEMI PCI did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden subgroup the trends toward reduced CV death and increased stroke or TIA provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION—: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02552407, PROSPERO CRD42015025936 (Less)

Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration.

Background: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. Results: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.01; P=0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98–2.10; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.98; P=0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–2.42, P=0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. Conclusions: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. Clinical Trial Registration: URLs: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifiers: NCT02552407 and CRD42015025936.Background: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. Results: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–1.01; P =0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98–2.10; P =0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.98; P =0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02–2.42, P =0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. Conclusions: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. Clinical Trial Registration: URLs: . Unique identifiers: [NCT02552407][1] and CRD42015025936. # Clinical Perspective {#article-title-14} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT02552407&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F135%2F2%2F143.atomBACKGROUND—: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with STEMI. METHODS—: Included were large (N≥1000) randomized controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy vs. PCI alone in patients with STEMI. Individual patient data was provided by the leadership of each trial. The pre-specified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular (CV) mortality within 30 days and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) within 30 days. RESULTS—: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS, TASTE and TOTAL) enrolled 19,047 patients, of whom 18,306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. CV death at 30 days occurred in 221 (2.4%) of 9155 patients randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 (2.9%) of 9151 randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; 95% CI 0.70-1.01, p=0.06). Stroke or TIA occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio [OR] 1.43 95% CI 0.98-2.1, p=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI thrombus grade ≥3) thrombus aspiration was associated with less CV death (170 [2.5%] vs. 205 [3.1%] HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65-0.98, p =0.03), and with more stroke or TIA (55 [0.9%] vs. 34 [0.5%] OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.02-2.42, p=0.04). However, the interaction p-values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS—: Routine thrombus aspiration during STEMI PCI did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden subgroup the trends toward reduced CV death and increased stroke or TIA provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION—: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02552407, PROSPERO CRD42015025936 (Less)

Warfarin treatment quality is consistently high in both anticoagulation clinics and primary care setting in Sweden

BACKGROUND Warfarin treatment in Sweden holds a high standard with time in therapeutic range (TTR) over 75%. Internationally, specialized anticoagulation clinics (ACC) have shown higher TTR compared to primary health care centres (PHCC). OBJECTIVES To compare warfarin treatment quality in Sweden for ACC versus PHCC, thereby clarifying whether centralization is for the better. PATIENTS/METHODS In total 77.058 patients corresponding to 217.058 treatment years with warfarin in the Swedish national quality register AuriculA from 1. Jan 2006 to 31. Dec 2011. Information regarding TTR was calculated from AuriculA, while patient characteristics and complications were retrieved from the Swedish National Patient Register. RESULTS Of the 100.554 treatment periods examined, 78.7% were monitored at ACC. Mean TTR for INR 2-3 for all patients irrespective of intended target range was 76.5% with an annual risk of bleeding or thrombotic events of 2.24% and 2.66%, respectively. TTR was significantly higher in PHCC compared to ACC (79.6% vs. 75.7%, p<0.001), with no significant difference in overall risk of complications. Treatment periods for atrial fibrillation, except intended direct current conversion, showed similar results between ACC and PHCC without significant difference in annual risk of bleeding (2.50% vs. 2.51%) or thrombosis (3.09% vs. 3.16%). After propensity score matching there was still no significant difference in complication risk found. CONCLUSIONS Warfarin treatment quality is consistently high in both ACC and PHCC when monitored through AuriculA in Sweden, both measured as TTR and as risk of complications. In this setting, centralized warfarin monitoring is not likely to improve the results.

Contemporary use of ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome : insights from Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART)

AIMS The platelet inhibitor ticagrelor is strongly recommended during 12 months post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in European guidelines. We analysed clinical characteristics of patients given ticagrelor for ACS in the real world. METHODS AND RESULTS We studied the use of ticagrelor in patients admitted for ACS in Sweden between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 who were enrolled in the Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART). Clinical characteristics were investigated for patients prescribed ticagrelor at discharge as well as for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention who were prescribed ticagrelor. Independent factors associated with selecting ticagrelor were analysed in logistic regression. We found that 44.0% (n = 12 601) out of a total of 28 639 patients had been prescribed ticagrelor at discharge. After adjusting for age and sex, prior cardiovascular disease was less common in patients discharged on ticagrelor (myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and peripheral vascular disease; P for all <0.001). The risk of death as predicted by GRACE score and the risk of major bleeding as predicted by CRUSADE score were both lower in ticagrelor-treated patients vs. others (median 99 vs. 126 and median 23 vs. 25, respectively; P for both < 0.001). The intended treatment duration at discharge was 12 months in 82.5% of patients and <12 months in 9.3%. CONCLUSION Ticagrelor is preferentially being used in patients at lower risk. A minority of patients are recommended ticagrelor during <12 months.

Computer aided warfarin dosing in the Swedish national quality registry AuriculA - Algorithmic suggestions are performing better than manually changed doses

INTRODUCTION Warfarin treatment with a high time in therapeutic range (TTR) is correlated to fewer complications. The TTR in Sweden is generally high but varies partly depending on local expertise and traditions. A dosing algorithm could minimize variations and increase treatment quality. Here we evaluate the performance of a computerized dosing algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS 53.779 warfarin treated patients from 125 centers using the Swedish national quality registry AuriculA. If certain criteria are met, the algorithm gives one of seven possible dose suggestions, which can be unchanged, decreased or increased weekly dose by 5, 10 or 15%. The outcome evaluated by the resulting INR value was compared between dose suggestions arising from the algorithm that were accepted and those that were manually changed. There were no randomization, and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS Both the algorithm-based and the manually changed doses had worse outcome if only two instead of three previous INR values were available. The algorithm suggestions were superior to manual dosing regarding percent samples within the target range 2-3 (hit-rate) or deviation from INR 2.5 (mean error). Of the seven possible outcomes from the algorithm, six were significantly superior and one equal to the manually changed doses when three previous INR:s were present. CONCLUSIONS The algorithm-based dosing suggestions show better outcome in most cases. This can make dosing of warfarin easier and more efficient. There are however cases where manual dosing fares better. Here the algorithm will be improved to further enhance its dosing performance in the future.

Bleeding complications and mortality in warfarin-treated VTE patients, dependence of INR variability and iTTR

High quality of warfarin treatment is important to prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) without bleeding complications. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of individual time in therapeutic range (iTTR) and International Normalised Ratio (INR) variability on bleeding risk and mortality in a large cohort of well-managed patients with warfarin due to VTE. A cohort of 16612 patients corresponding to 19502 treatment periods with warfarin due to VTE between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2011 was retrieved from the Swedish national quality register AuriculA and matched with the Swedish National Patient Register for bleeding complications and background characteristics and the Cause of death register for occurrence and date of death. The rate of bleeding was 1.79 (confidence interval (CI) 95 % 1.66-1.93) per 100 treatment years among all patients. Those with poor warfarin treatment quality had a higher rate of clinically relevant bleeding, both when measured as iTTR below 70 %, 2.91 (CI 95 % 2.61-3.21) or as INR variability over the mean value 0.85, 2.61 (CI 95 % 2.36-2.86). Among those with both high INR variability and low iTTR the risk of clinically relevant bleeding was clearly increased hazard ratio (HR) 3.47 (CI 95 % 2.89-4.17). A similar result was found for all-cause mortality with a HR of 3.67 (CI 95 % 3.02-4.47). Both a low iTTR and a high INR variability increase the risk of bleeding complications or mortality. When combining the two treatment quality indicators patients at particular high risk of bleeding or death can be identified.

Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants are non-inferior for stroke prevention but cause fewer major bleedings than well-managed warfarin : a retrospective register study

Background For patients with atrial fibrillation, non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants, or NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and apixaban) have been proven non-inferior or superior to warfarin in preventing stroke and systemic embolism, and in risk of haemorrhage. In the pivotal NOAC studies, quality of warfarin treatment was poor with mean time in therapeutic range (TTR) 55–65%, compared with ≥70% in Swedish clinical practice. Methods We compared NOACs (as a group) to warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, studying all 12,694 patients starting NOAC treatment within the Swedish clinical register and dosing system Auricula, from July 1, 2011 to December 31, 2014, and matching them to 36,317 patients starting warfarin using propensity scoring. Endpoints were thromboembolic events and major bleedings that were fatal or required hospital care. Outcome data were collected from validated Swedish hospital administrative and clinical registers. Results Mean age was 72.2 vs 72.3 years, proportion of males 58.2% vs 57.0%, and mean follow-up time 299 vs 283 days for NOACs and warfarin. Distribution of NOACs was: dabigatran 40.3%, rivaroxaban 31.2%, and apixaban 28.5%. Mean TTR was 70%. There were no significant differences in rates of thromboembolic/thrombotic events or gastrointestinal bleeding. NOAC treated patients had lower rates of major bleeding overall, hazard ratio 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.67–0.92), intracranial bleeding 0.59 (0.40–0.87), haemorrhagic stroke 0.49 (0.28–0.86), and other major bleeding 0.71 (0.57–0.89). Conclusion For patients with atrial fibrillation, NOACs are as effective for stroke prevention as well-managed warfarin but cause fewer major bleedings.