心脏植入式电子装置置入后直接口服抗凝剂的应用。

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":"心脏植入式电子装置置入后直接口服抗凝剂的应用。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

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

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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