Peri-procedural anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation must be optimized to reduce the occurrence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications. In this study, the safety of two anticoagulants were compared between the commonly used warfarin and a potential alternative, orally administered low-dose (110 mg bid) dabigatran. A total of 117 Han Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation were included in the study. In all, 67 patients were administered dabigatran (110 mg) twice daily, while the other 50 received a therapeutically effective dose of warfarin. Thromboembolic and bleeding complications were compared between the two groups. No significant baseline differences were found between the groups. Only one thromboembolic complication (2.0%) occurred in the warfarin group, while no complications occurred in the dabigatran group (p = 0.43). Compared to the warfarin group, the dabigatran group showed a similar rate of major bleeding events (2.0% vs. 0; p = 0.43), but a significantly lower rate of minor bleeding events (9.0% vs. 22%; p = 0.048), total bleeding events (9% vs. 24%; p = 0.03), and bleeding and thromboembolic complications taken together (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.01). In Conclusion, the incidence of minor bleeding events after AF ablation was lower in those administered low-dose dabigatran (110 mg bid) than in those administered warfarin, while the risks of thromboembolic and major bleeding complications were similar between the two groups. This result indicates that low-dose dabigatran would be safer than warfarin in Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation.
| Published in | Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research (Volume 2, Issue 4) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13 |
| Page(s) | 83-90 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Dabigatran, Warfarin, Atrial Fibrillation, Catheter Ablation, Anticoagulation
| [1] | Cappato R, Calkins H, Chen SA, Davies W, Iesaka Y, Kalman J, Kim YH, Klein G, Packer D and Skanes A. Worldwide survey on the methods, efficacy, and safety of catheter ablation for human atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2005; 111: 1100-1105. |
| [2] | Calkins H, Kuck KH, Cappato R, Brugada J, Camm AJ, Chen SA, Crijns HJ, Damiano RJ, Davies DW, DiMarco J, Edgerton J, Ellenbogen K, Ezekowitz MD, Haines DE, Haissaguerre M, Hindricks G, Iesaka Y, Jackman W, Jalife J, Jais P, Kalman J, Keane D, Kim YH, Kirchhof P, Klein G, Kottkamp H, Kumagai K, Lindsay BD, Mansour M, Marchlinski FE, McCarthy PM, Mont JL, Morady F, Nademanee K, Nakagawa H, Natale A, Nattel S, Packer DL, Pappone C, Prystowsky E, Raviele A, Reddy V, Ruskin JN, Shemin RJ, Tsao HM and Wilber D. 2012 HRS/EHRA/ECAS Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter and Surgical Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: recommendations for patient selection, procedural techniques, patient management and follow-up, definitions, endpoints, and research trial design. Europace 2012; 14: 528-606. |
| [3] | Hylek EM, Evans-Molina C, Shea C, Henault LE and Regan S. Major hemorrhage and tolerability of warfarin in the first year of therapy among elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2007; 115: 2689-2696. |
| [4] | Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, Eikelboom J, Oldgren J, Parekh A, Pogue J, Reilly PA, Themeles E, Varrone J, Wang S, Alings M, Xavier D, Zhu J, Diaz R, Lewis BS, Darius H, Diener HC, Joyner CD and Wallentin L. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1139-1151. |
| [5] | Phan K, Wang N, Pison L, Kumar N, Hitos K and Thomas SP. Meta-analysis of dabigatran vs warfarin in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Int J Cardiol 2015; 189: 199-203. |
| [6] | Providência R, Albenque JP, Combes S, Bouzeman A, Casteigt B, Combes N, Narayanan K, Marijon E and Boveda S. Safety and efficacy of dabigatran versus warfarin in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart 2014; 100: 324-335. |
| [7] | Aryal MR, Ukaigwe A, Pandit A, Karmacharya P, Pradhan R, Mainali NR, Pathak R, Jalota L, Bhandari Y and Donato A. Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin or dabigatran in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2014; 114: 577-582. |
| [8] | Bin AAA, Khan AR, Tleyjeh IM, Spertus JA, Sanders SU, Steigerwalt KE, Garbati MA, Bahmaid RA and Wimmer AP. Safety and efficacy of interrupted dabigatran for peri-procedural anticoagulation in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Europace 2013; 15: 1412-1420. |
| [9] | Camm AJ. The RE-LY study: Randomized Evaluation of Long-term anticoagulant therapY: dabigatran vs. warfarin. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 2554-2555. |
| [10] | Bassiouny M, Saliba W, Rickard J, Shao M, Sey A, Diab M, Martin DO, Hussein A, Khoury M, Abi-Saleh B, Alam S, Sengupta J, Borek PP, Baranowski B, Niebauer M, Callahan T, Varma N, Chung M, Tchou PJ, Kanj M, Dresing T, Lindsay BD and Wazni O. Use of dabigatran for periprocedural anticoagulation in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2013; 6: 460-466. |
| [11] | Kaseno K, Naito S, Nakamura K, Sakamoto T, Sasaki T, Tsukada N, Hayano M, Nishiuchi S, Fuke E, Miki Y, Nakamura K, Yamashita E, Kumagai K, Oshima S and Tada H. Efficacy and safety of periprocedural dabigatran in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Circ J 2012; 76: 2337-2342. |
| [12] | Lakkireddy D, Reddy YM, Di BL, Vanga SR, Santangeli P, Swarup V, Pimentel R, Mansour MC, D'Avila A, Sanchez JE, Burkhardt JD, Chalhoub F, Mohanty P, Coffey J, Shaik N, Monir G, Reddy VY, Ruskin J and Natale A. Feasibility and safety of dabigatran versus warfarin for periprocedural anticoagulation in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: results from a multicenter prospective registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59: 1168-1174. |
| [13] | Arshad A, Johnson CK, Mittal S, Buch E, Hamam I, Tran T, Shaw RE, Musat D, Preminger M, Sichrovsky T, Herweg B, Shivkumar K, Hummel J and Steinberg JS. Comparative safety of periablation anticoagulation strategies for atrial fibrillation: data from a large multicenter study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2014; 37: 665-673. |
| [14] | Kim JS, She F, Jongnarangsin K, Chugh A, Latchamsetty R, Ghanbari H, Crawford T, Suwanagool A, Sinno M, Carrigan T, Kennedy R, Saint-Phard W, Yokokawa M, Good E, Bogun F, Pelosi F, Morady F and Oral H. Dabigatran vs warfarin for radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm 2013; 10: 483-489. |
| [15] | Hohnloser SH and Camm AJ. Safety and efficacy of dabigatran etexilate during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of the literature. Europace 2013; 15: 1407-1411. |
| [16] | Wu S, Yang YM, Zhu J, Wan HB, Wang J, Zhang H and Shao XH. Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of New Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Uninterrupted Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2016; 117: 926-934. |
| [17] | Calkins H, Willems S, Gerstenfeld EP, Verma A, Schilling R, Hohnloser SH, Okumura K, Serota H, Nordaby M, Guiver K, Biss B, Brouwer MA and Grimaldi M. Uninterrupted Dabigatran versus Warfarin for Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 1627-1636. |
| [18] | Nin T, Sairaku A, Yoshida Y, Kamiya H, Tatematsu Y, Nanasato M, Inden Y, Hirayama H and Murohara T. A randomized controlled trial of dabigatran versus warfarin for periablation anticoagulation in patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2013; 36: 172-179. |
| [19] | Maddox W, Kay GN, Yamada T, Osorio J, Doppalapudi H, Plumb VJ, Gunter A and McElderry HT. Dabigatran versus warfarin therapy for uninterrupted oral anticoagulation during atrial fibrillation ablation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2013; 24: 861-865. |
| [20] | Efremidis M, Vlachos K, Letsas KP, Giannopoulos G, Lioni L, Georgopoulos S, Vadiaka M, Deftereos S and Sideris A. Low dose dabigatran versus uninterrupted acenocoumarol for peri-procedural anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation catheter ablation. J Electrocardiol 2015; 48: 840-844. |
| [21] | Yap LB, Rusani BI, Umadevan D, Muhammad Z, Hussin A, Kaur S and Omar R. A single centre experience of the efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2014; 38: 39-44. |
| [22] | Steinberg BA, Hasselblad V, Atwater BD, Bahnson TD, Washam JB, Alexander JH, Daubert JP and Piccini JP. Dabigatran for periprocedural anticoagulation following radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of observational studies. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 2013; 37: 213-221. |
| [23] | Shurrab M, Morillo CA, Schulman S, Kansal N, Danon A, Newman D, Lashevsky I, Healey JS and Crystal E. Safety and efficacy of dabigatran compared with warfarin for patients undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol 2013; 29: 1203-1210. |
| [24] | Wallentin L, Yusuf S, Ezekowitz MD, Alings M, Flather M, Franzosi MG, Pais P, Dans A, Eikelboom J, Oldgren J, Pogue J, Reilly PA, Yang S and Connolly SJ. Efficacy and safety of dabigatran compared with warfarin at different levels of international normalised ratio control for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: an analysis of the RE-LY trial. Lancet 2010; 376: 975-983. |
| [25] | Chang CH, Yang YH, Chen JH and Lin LJ. Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation in Taiwan. Thromb Res 2014; 133: 782-789. |
APA Style
Haixia Xu, Yanmin Zhu, Ying Hua, Yinhao Huang, Qi Lu. (2018). Low-Dose Dabigatran May Be Safely Used as an Alternative to Warfarin for Peri-Procedural Anticoagulation During Atrial Fibrillation Ablation. Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research, 2(4), 83-90. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13
ACS Style
Haixia Xu; Yanmin Zhu; Ying Hua; Yinhao Huang; Qi Lu. Low-Dose Dabigatran May Be Safely Used as an Alternative to Warfarin for Peri-Procedural Anticoagulation During Atrial Fibrillation Ablation. Cardiol. Cardiovasc. Res. 2018, 2(4), 83-90. doi: 10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13,
author = {Haixia Xu and Yanmin Zhu and Ying Hua and Yinhao Huang and Qi Lu},
title = {Low-Dose Dabigatran May Be Safely Used as an Alternative to Warfarin for Peri-Procedural Anticoagulation During Atrial Fibrillation Ablation},
journal = {Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research},
volume = {2},
number = {4},
pages = {83-90},
doi = {10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ccr.20180204.13},
abstract = {Peri-procedural anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation must be optimized to reduce the occurrence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications. In this study, the safety of two anticoagulants were compared between the commonly used warfarin and a potential alternative, orally administered low-dose (110 mg bid) dabigatran. A total of 117 Han Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation were included in the study. In all, 67 patients were administered dabigatran (110 mg) twice daily, while the other 50 received a therapeutically effective dose of warfarin. Thromboembolic and bleeding complications were compared between the two groups. No significant baseline differences were found between the groups. Only one thromboembolic complication (2.0%) occurred in the warfarin group, while no complications occurred in the dabigatran group (p = 0.43). Compared to the warfarin group, the dabigatran group showed a similar rate of major bleeding events (2.0% vs. 0; p = 0.43), but a significantly lower rate of minor bleeding events (9.0% vs. 22%; p = 0.048), total bleeding events (9% vs. 24%; p = 0.03), and bleeding and thromboembolic complications taken together (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.01). In Conclusion, the incidence of minor bleeding events after AF ablation was lower in those administered low-dose dabigatran (110 mg bid) than in those administered warfarin, while the risks of thromboembolic and major bleeding complications were similar between the two groups. This result indicates that low-dose dabigatran would be safer than warfarin in Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation.},
year = {2018}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Low-Dose Dabigatran May Be Safely Used as an Alternative to Warfarin for Peri-Procedural Anticoagulation During Atrial Fibrillation Ablation AU - Haixia Xu AU - Yanmin Zhu AU - Ying Hua AU - Yinhao Huang AU - Qi Lu Y1 - 2018/12/19 PY - 2018 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13 DO - 10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13 T2 - Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research JF - Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research JO - Cardiology and Cardiovascular Research SP - 83 EP - 90 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2578-8914 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ccr.20180204.13 AB - Peri-procedural anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation must be optimized to reduce the occurrence of bleeding and thromboembolic complications. In this study, the safety of two anticoagulants were compared between the commonly used warfarin and a potential alternative, orally administered low-dose (110 mg bid) dabigatran. A total of 117 Han Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation were included in the study. In all, 67 patients were administered dabigatran (110 mg) twice daily, while the other 50 received a therapeutically effective dose of warfarin. Thromboembolic and bleeding complications were compared between the two groups. No significant baseline differences were found between the groups. Only one thromboembolic complication (2.0%) occurred in the warfarin group, while no complications occurred in the dabigatran group (p = 0.43). Compared to the warfarin group, the dabigatran group showed a similar rate of major bleeding events (2.0% vs. 0; p = 0.43), but a significantly lower rate of minor bleeding events (9.0% vs. 22%; p = 0.048), total bleeding events (9% vs. 24%; p = 0.03), and bleeding and thromboembolic complications taken together (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.01). In Conclusion, the incidence of minor bleeding events after AF ablation was lower in those administered low-dose dabigatran (110 mg bid) than in those administered warfarin, while the risks of thromboembolic and major bleeding complications were similar between the two groups. This result indicates that low-dose dabigatran would be safer than warfarin in Chinese patients undergoing AF ablation. VL - 2 IS - 4 ER -
Information
Email: