District versus academic hospitals: differences in the clinical characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation without valvular heart disease treated with oral anticoagulants

INTRODUCTION Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia with a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are the first‑line drugs in stroke prevention in patients with AF. Oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy may differ between medical centers. OBJECTIVES We compared the clinical characteristics of AF patients treated with OAC in a district and an academic hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS We analyzed 3528 patients from the multicenter retrospective CRAFT study: 2666 patients from the academic hospital and 862 patients from the district hospital. Their baseline clinical characteristics were compared. RESULTS Patients treated in the district hospital were older (mean [SD] age, 73.9 [10.3] years vs 66.0 [13.4] years; P <0.001) and more likely female (49.1% vs 37.4%; P <0.001). Patients treated in the academic hospital more frequently had paroxysmal AF, while those in the district hospital, permanent AF. The latter group was also more likely to have comorbidities and a higher frequency of previous bleeding episodes or anemia. The groups did not differ regarding kidney function. In both groups, patients were significantly more likely to be on rivaroxaban than on dabigatran. The group treated in the district hospital were at higher risk of thromboembolic events than the other gruop (mean [SD] CHA2DS2VASc score, 4.6 [1.7] vs 3.05 [2.0]; P <0.001), as well as of hemorrhagic events (mean [SD] HASBLED score, 0.6 [0.7] vs 0.4 [0.6]; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS Patients with AF treated with OACs in the district and academic hospitals have different clinical characteristics. Patients treated in the district hospital were older, had more comorbidities, more frequently had permanent AF, and were at higher risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events than patients treated in the academic hospital.

[1]  Hugh Calkins,et al.  Uninterrupted Dabigatran versus Warfarin for Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  G. Aksan,et al.  Guideline-adherent therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation in different health care settings: Results from RAMSES study. , 2017, European journal of internal medicine.

[3]  P. Kirchhof,et al.  Oral anticoagulant use in octogenarian European patients with atrial fibrillation: A subanalysis of PREFER in AF. , 2017, International journal of cardiology.

[4]  G. Lip,et al.  The Changing Landscape for Stroke Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  Y. Okumura,et al.  Current use of direct oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation in Japan: Findings from the SAKURA AF Registry , 2017, Journal of arrhythmia.

[6]  A. Camm,et al.  Evolving antithrombotic treatment patterns for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation , 2016, Heart.

[7]  P. Kirchhof,et al.  2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. , 2016, European heart journal.

[8]  J. Stȩpińska,et al.  Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients in Poland and other European countries: insights from the GARFIELD-AF registry. , 2016, Kardiologia polska.

[9]  G. Boriani,et al.  'Real-world' management and outcomes of patients with paroxysmal vs. non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in Europe: the EURObservational Research Programme-Atrial Fibrillation (EORP-AF) General Pilot Registry. , 2016, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[10]  M. Ezekowitz,et al.  2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. , 2014, Circulation.

[11]  Y. Chun,et al.  Current status of clinical background of patients with atrial fibrillation in a community-based survey: the Fushimi AF Registry. , 2013, Journal of cardiology.

[12]  A. Banerjee,et al.  Net clinical benefit of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus no treatment in a ‘real world’ atrial fibrillation population: A modelling analysis based on a nationwide cohort study , 2011, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[13]  N. Peters,et al.  Atrial fibrillation: strategies to control, combat, and cure , 2002, The Lancet.

[14]  P. Wolf,et al.  Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study. , 1991, Stroke.

[15]  A. Belanger,et al.  The Framingham study. , 1976, British medical journal.

[16]  K. Żukowska,et al.  Comparison of clinical characteristics of real-life atrial fibrillation patients treated with vitamin K antagonists, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban: results from the CRAFT study. , 2018, Kardiologia polska.

[17]  T. Urbanek,et al.  Rivaroxaban in secondary cardiogenic stroke prevention: two-year single-centre experience based on follow-up of 209 patients. , 2016, Kardiologia polska.

[18]  A. Sokal,et al.  Polish and European management strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation. Data from the EURObservational Research Programme-Atrial Fibrillation General Registry Pilot Phase (EORP-AF Pilot). , 2016, Polskie Archiwum Medycyny Wewnetrznej.

[19]  Gerhard Hindricks,et al.  2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation--developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. , 2012, Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology.