Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Following Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Placement.

IF 1.3
Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-31 DOI:10.1111/pace.70016
Carmel Ashur, Li Qin, Karl E Minges, James V Freeman, Sana M Al-Khatib, Steven M Bradley, P Michael Ho, Wendy S Tzou, Paul D Varosy, Paul L Hess, Amneet Sandhu
{"title":"Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Following Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Placement.","authors":"Carmel Ashur, Li Qin, Karl E Minges, James V Freeman, Sana M Al-Khatib, Steven M Bradley, P Michael Ho, Wendy S Tzou, Paul D Varosy, Paul L Hess, Amneet Sandhu","doi":"10.1111/pace.70016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Small studies have described the safety of uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing elective, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) placement. Real-world practice patterns and associated outcomes remain poorly defined.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Describe DOAC usage trends following uncomplicated, outpatient CIED placement in AF patients and evaluate clinical outcomes based on DOAC status at discharge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, AF patients with CHA<sub>2</sub>DS<sub>2</sub>-VASc ≥ 2 undergoing uncomplicated, outpatient CIED placement from April 2016 to December 2019 were stratified by DOAC prescription at discharge. Short and longer-term temporal trends and post-discharge outcomes were assessed using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) claims.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 59,169 AF patients with elevated thromboembolic eligible for DOAC therapy who underwent elective, new CIED implant or generator replacement, 32,025 (54.1%) were discharged on a DOAC. Annual rates of DOAC use at discharge increased from 47.0% in 2016 to 62.5% in 2019 (p < 0.0001). Overall, patients discharged on DOAC had higher adjusted rates of pocket hematoma (0.51% vs. 0.33%, p = 0.0007) and lower rates of stroke (2.9% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.05) at 30-days but no significant differences in device infection or need for revision at 30-days or 1-year. Those undergoing new CIED implant had higher rates of pocket hematoma at 30-days (0.53% vs. 0.36%, p = 0.02) and need for device revision at 1-year (1.6% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In AF patients undergoing CIED implantation, about half were discharged on DOACs, with increasing rates of DOAC resumption immediately following post-CIED implantation over the study period. Those discharged on DOACs had modestly higher rates of pocket hematoma or need for device revision but similar risk of device infection.</p>","PeriodicalId":520740,"journal":{"name":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","volume":" ","pages":"859-869"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pace.70016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Small studies have described the safety of uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing elective, cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) placement. Real-world practice patterns and associated outcomes remain poorly defined.

Objective: Describe DOAC usage trends following uncomplicated, outpatient CIED placement in AF patients and evaluate clinical outcomes based on DOAC status at discharge.

Methods: Using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, AF patients with CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 undergoing uncomplicated, outpatient CIED placement from April 2016 to December 2019 were stratified by DOAC prescription at discharge. Short and longer-term temporal trends and post-discharge outcomes were assessed using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) claims.

Results: Among 59,169 AF patients with elevated thromboembolic eligible for DOAC therapy who underwent elective, new CIED implant or generator replacement, 32,025 (54.1%) were discharged on a DOAC. Annual rates of DOAC use at discharge increased from 47.0% in 2016 to 62.5% in 2019 (p < 0.0001). Overall, patients discharged on DOAC had higher adjusted rates of pocket hematoma (0.51% vs. 0.33%, p = 0.0007) and lower rates of stroke (2.9% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.05) at 30-days but no significant differences in device infection or need for revision at 30-days or 1-year. Those undergoing new CIED implant had higher rates of pocket hematoma at 30-days (0.53% vs. 0.36%, p = 0.02) and need for device revision at 1-year (1.6% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.04).

Conclusion: In AF patients undergoing CIED implantation, about half were discharged on DOACs, with increasing rates of DOAC resumption immediately following post-CIED implantation over the study period. Those discharged on DOACs had modestly higher rates of pocket hematoma or need for device revision but similar risk of device infection.

心脏植入式电子装置置入后直接口服抗凝剂的应用。
背景:小型研究已经描述了不间断直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)在接受选择性心脏植入式电子装置(CIED)置放的房颤(AF)患者中的安全性。现实世界的实践模式和相关的结果仍然模糊不清。目的:描述房颤患者在门诊放置简易CIED后DOAC的使用趋势,并评估出院时DOAC状态的临床结果。方法:使用国家心血管数据登记处的数据,将2016年4月至2019年12月接受无并发症门诊CIED安置的CHA2DS2-VASc≥2的房颤患者按出院时DOAC处方分层。使用医疗保险和医疗补助(CMS)索赔中心评估短期和长期趋势和出院后结果。结果:在符合DOAC治疗条件的59,169例血栓栓塞升高的房颤患者中,有32,025例(54.1%)接受DOAC治疗出院,这些患者接受了选择性的新的CIED植入物或发生器更换。出院时DOAC的年使用率从2016年的47.0%上升到2019年的62.5% (p结论:在接受CIED植入的AF患者中,约有一半患者出院时使用DOAC,在研究期间,CIED植入后立即恢复DOAC的比例有所增加。DOACs出院的患者有较高的口袋血肿率或器械翻修的需要,但器械感染的风险相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信