Show simple item record

Prevalence and Predictors of Warfarin Use in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation at Low or Intermediate Risk and Relation to Thromboembolic Events

dc.contributor.authorChae, Sanders H.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFroehlich, James B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMorady, Freden_US
dc.contributor.authorOral, Hakanen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-11-10T15:32:33Z
dc.date.available2012-12-03T21:17:29Zen_US
dc.date.issued2011-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationChae, Sanders H.; Froehlich, James; Morady, Fred; Oral, Hakan (2011). "Prevalence and Predictors of Warfarin Use in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation at Low or Intermediate Risk and Relation to Thromboembolic Events." Clinical Cardiology 34(10): 640-644. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86871>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0160-9289en_US
dc.identifier.issn1932-8737en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/86871
dc.description.abstractBackground: According to the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the choice of aspirin or warfarin to prevent thromboembolic events (TEs) in patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation (AF) should be based on the CHADS 2 score. The purpose of this study was to determine the predictors of warfarin use in patients with AF at low (CHADS 2 =0) or intermediate (CHADS 2 =1) risk for TEs. Hypothesis: Warfarin use is low in intermediate‐ and low‐risk patients. Methods: Clinical characteristics of 3086 consecutive patients (mean age, 70 ± 13 years) with nonrheumatic AF from an academic multispecialty practice were determined between 2006 and 2008 through individual chart review. Patients were identified based on an inpatient or outpatient encounter, in which a billing diagnosis code of AF or atrial flutter (AFl) was recorded. The decision for anticoagulation was at the discretion of the primary care physician or cardiologist. No intervention to guide anticoagulant therapy was made. Results: Warfarin was prescribed in 180/497 low‐risk patients (36%), and in 646/938 intermediate‐risk patients (69%). Among high‐risk patients (CHADS 2 ≥2), warfarin was used in 792/968 patients (82%) with a CHADS 2 = 2, in 343/410 patients (84%) with a CHADS 2 =3, and in 225/273 patients (82%) with a CHADS 2 ≥4. On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of warfarin use in low‐risk patients were nonparoxysmal AF (odds ratio [OR]: 5.02, P< 0.0001) and age between 65 and 74 years (OR: 2.21, P< 0.0001). Among intermediate‐risk patients, congestive heart failure (OR: 7.34, P< 0.0001), nonparoxysmal AF (OR: 4.04, P< 0.0001), coronary artery disease (OR: 2.53, P< 0.0001), age between 65 and 74 years (OR: 1.68, P = 0.002), and female gender (OR: 1.69, P = 0.002) were independent predictors of warfarin use. Lack of warfarin use (OR: 4.9, P< 0.001) and female gender (OR: 2.0, P = 0.03) were associated with a higher risk of TEs in intermediate‐risk patients. None of the CHADS 2 parameters was predictive of TEs. Warfarin was not associated with reduction in TEs in low‐risk patients. Warfarin use did not have a significant effect on bleeding. Conclusions: Although either aspirin or warfarin is recommended to prevent TEs in patients with AF at intermediate risk for TEs, warfarin is preferred in the majority of patients in general practice. Lack of warfarin use is associated with a higher risk of TEs in intermediate‐risk patients with AF. The adoption of new oral anticoagulants that have lower risk of major hemorrhage than warfarin for low‐ or intermediate‐risk AF patients remains to be determined. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titlePrevalence and Predictors of Warfarin Use in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation at Low or Intermediate Risk and Relation to Thromboembolic Eventsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelInternal Medicine and Specialitiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumCardiovascular Medicine, CVC, SPC5853 University of Michigan 1500 E. Medical Center Dr. Ann Arbor, MI 48109‐5853en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Floridaen_US
dc.identifier.pmid21994084en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86871/1/20967_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/clc.20967en_US
dc.identifier.sourceClinical Cardiologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFuster V, Ryden LE, Cannom DS, et al. ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: full text: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2001 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society. Europace. 2006; 8: 651 – 745.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study. Final results. Circulation. 1991; 84: 527 – 539.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceConnolly SJ, Laupacis A, Gent M, et al. Canadian Atrial Fibrillation Anticoagulation (CAFA) Study. J Am CollCardiol. 1991; 18: 349 – 355.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHart RG, Pearce LA, Aguilar MI. Meta‐analysis: antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2007; 146: 857 – 867.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHylek EM, Evans‐Molina C, Shea C, et al. Major hemorrhage and tolerability of warfarin in the first year of therapy among elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2007; 115: 2689 – 2696.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGage BF, Van Walraven C, Pearce L, et al. Selecting patients with atrial fibrillation for anticoagulation: stroke risk stratification in patients taking aspirin. Circulation. 2004; 110: 2287 – 2292.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLewis WR, Fonarow GC, LaBresh KA, et al. Differential use of warfarin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with various types of atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol. 2009; 103: 227 – 231.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWaldo AL, Becker RC, Tapson VF, et al. Hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation and a high risk of stroke are not being provided with adequate anticoagulation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005; 46: 1729 – 1736.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCamm AJ, Kirchof P, Lip GYH, et al. Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2010; 31: 2369 – 2429.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWann LS, Curtis AB, Ellenbogen KA, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/ HRS focused update on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (update on dabigatran). Circulation. 2011; 123: 1144 – 1150.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSinger DE, Chang Y, Fang MC, et al. The net clinical benefit of warfarin anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 297 – 305.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceConnolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361: 1139 – 1151.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceConnolly SJ, Eikelboom J, Joyner C, et al. Apixaban in atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 806 – 817.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. JAMA. 2001; 285: 2864 – 2870.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrass LM, Krumholz HM, Scinto JM, et al. Warfarin use among patients with atrial fibrillation. Stroke. 1997; 28: 2382 – 2389.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLee BH, Park JS, Park JH, et al. The effect and safety of the antithrombotic therapies in patients with atrial fibrillation and CHADS score 1. J CardiovascElectrophysiol. 2010; 21: 501 – 507.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.