Current Cardiology Reports

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 16–22 | Cite as

Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: Warfarin faces its challengers

  • Joseph L. Blackshear
  • Fred Kusumoto
Article

Abstract

Warfarin is exceedingly effective and underutilized in treating atrial fibrillation. Recently completed studies of alternative therapies include trials of ximelagatran versus warfarin, antiplatelet therapy plus lower-intensity warfarin versus usual warfarin, and strategies of rhythm versus rate control. Results of these studies suggest new options for treatment, and caveats regarding those who appear to have durable sinus rhythm. Ongoing trials include studies of combined antiplatelet therapy and other antithrombins. Nonpharmacologic approaches include the Maze III procedure and similar operations, left atrial appendage obliteration, and catheter-based radiofrequency ablation procedures. The place of these latter therapies will only be defined through subsequent clinical trials.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Feinberg WM, Blackshear JL, Laupacis A, et al.: Prevalence, age distribution, and gender of patients with atrial fibrillation. Analysis and implications. Arch Intern Med 1995, 155:469–473.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Go AS, Hylek EM, Phillips KA, et al.: Prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation in adults: national implications for rhythm management and stroke prevention: the AnTicoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study. JAMA 2001, 285:2370–2375. The most current review of AF demographicsPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benjamin EJ, Levy D, Vaziri SM, et al.: Independent risk factors for atrial fibrillation in a population-based cohort. The Framingham Heart Study. JAMA 1994, 271:840–844.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vaziri SM, Larson MG, Benjamin EJ, Levy D: Echocardiographic predictors of nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 1994, 89:724–730.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mathew JP, Fontes ML, Tudor IC, et al.: investigators of the Ischemia Research and Education Foundation: Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Research Group. A multicenter risk index for atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. JAMA 2004, 291:1720–1729.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gage 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. Key study summarizing thromboembolic risk assessment in AF.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hart RG, Boop BS, Anderson DC: Oral anticoagulants and intracranial hemorrhage. Facts and hypotheses. Stroke 1995, 26:1471–1477.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Atrial Fibrillation Investigators: Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation. Analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials Arch Intern Med 1994, 154:1449–1457. This study summarizes the critical trials of warfarin in AF.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    The Atrial Fibrillation Investigators: The efficacy of aspirin in patients with atrial fibrillation: analysis of pooled data from 3 randomized trials. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:1237–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stafford RS, Singer DE: National patterns of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 1996, 156:2537–2541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hylek EM, Chang YC, Skates SJ, et al.: Prospective study of the outcomes of ambulatory patients with excessive warfarin anticoagulation. Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:1612–1617.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Walraven C, Hart RG, Wells GA, et al.: A clinical prediction rule to identify patients with atrial fibrillation and a low risk for stroke while taking aspirin. Arch Intern Med 2003, 163:936–943. Some physicians wish to use aspirin in AF, whereas others insist on warfarin. This provides a “users guide” to when aspirin may be acceptable.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Olsson SB, Executive Steering Committee on behalf of the SPORTIF III Investigators: Stroke prevention with the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran compared with warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (SPORTIF III): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003, 362:1691–1698. First large-scale trial of ximelagatran in AF.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Halperin JL: Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor. Exp Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2004, 2:163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eikelboom J, Hankey G: Ximelagatran or warfarin in atrial fibrillation? Lancet 2003, 363:734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Investigators: Adjusteddose warfarin versus low-intensity, fixed-dose warfarin plus aspirin for high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation: Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation III randomised clinical trial. Lancet 1996, 348:633–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Perez Gomez F, Lourenzo PI, Companion J, et al.: Platelet aggregation in different antithrombotic regimens. Possible proaggregant effect of low level oral anticoagulation. Rev Port Cardiol 2002, 21:541–551.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Perez-Gomez F, Alegria E, Berjon J, et al.: Comparative effects of antiplatelet, anticoagulant or combined therapy in patients with valvular and non-valvular atrial fibrillation. A randomised multi-centre study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:1557–1566. First study of combined antiplatelet and vitamin K antagonist suggesting superiority over INR 2.0-3.0 without increased hemorrhagic risk.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wallentin L, Wilcox RG, Weaver WD, et al.: ESTEEM Investigators. Oral ximelagatran for secondary prophylaxis after myocardial infarction: the ESTEEM randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003, 362:789–797.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hohnloser SH, Connolly SJ: Combined antiplatelet therapy in atrial fibrillation: review of the literature and future avenues. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003, 14(9 Suppl):S60-S63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Donnan GA, Dewey HM, Chambers BR: Warfarin for atrial fibrillation: the end of an era? Lancet Neurol 2004, 3:305–308.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wyse DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, and the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Investigators: A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002, 347:1825–1833. This is a key clinical trial of strategy of rhythm control versus rate control. Key findings from the thromboembolism point of view are that AF rhythm control strategies are only approximately 50% effective over 3 to 5 years, and maybe less because strokes occurred in patients in whom warfarin was stopped or was subtherapeutic, suggesting intermittent asymptomatic AF recurrences occur with significant persistent stroke risk.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Van Gelder IC, Hagens VE, Bosker HA, et al.: Rate Control versus Electrical Cardioversion for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation Study Group: A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with recurrent persistent atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002, 347:1834–1840.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Corley SD, Epstein AE, DiMarco JP, et al.: AFFIRM Investigators: Relationships between sinus rhythm, treatment, and survival in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) Study. Circulation 2004, 109:1509–1513.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hagens VE, Van Gelder IC, Crijns HJ, Rate Control Versus Electrical Cardioversion of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (RACE) Study Group: The RACE study in perspective of randomized studies on management of persistent atrial fibrillation. Cardiac Electrophysiol Rev 2003, 7:118–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fang MC, Stafford RS, Ruskin JN, Singer DE: National trends in antiarrhythmic and antithrombotic medication use in atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 2004, 164:55–60. Study confirms persistent underuse of warfarin, and trends in rate and rhythm control medications.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prasad SM, Maniar HS, Camillo CJ, et al.: The Cox maze III procedure for atrial fibrillation: long-term efficacy in patients undergoing lone versus concomitant procedures. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003, 126:1822–1828. This study represents the frame of reference against which other procedures designed to maintain sinus rhythm should be measured.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sie HT, Buekema WP, Elvan A, et al.: Long-term results of irrigated radiofrequency modified Maze procedure in 200 patients with concomitant cardiac surgery: six years experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2004, 77:512–517.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chiappini B, Martin-Suarez S, LoForte A, et al.: Cox/Maze III operation versus radiofrequency ablation for surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation: a comparative study. Ann Thorac Surg 2004, 77:87–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Deneke T, Khargi K, Grewe PH, et al.: Left atrial versus biatrial Maze operation using intraoperatively cooled-Tip radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients undergoing open-heart surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 39:1644–1650.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Williams MR, Stewart JR, Bolling SF, et al.: Surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation using radiofrequency energy. Ann Thorac Surg 2001, 71:1939–1943.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Haissaguerre M, Jais P, Shah DC, et al.: Right and left atrial radiofrequency catheter therapy of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1996, 7:1132–1144.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Swartz JF, Pellersels G, Silvers J: A catheter based curative approach to atrial fibrillation in humans. Circulation 1994, 90:I-335.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Haissaguerre M, Jais P, Shah DC, et al.: Spontaneous initiation of atrial fibrillation by ectopic beats originating in the pulmonary veins. N Engl J Med 1998, 339:659–656.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gerstenfeld EP, Guerra P, Sparks PB, et al.: Clinical outcome after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2001, 12:900–908.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Marrouche NF, Dresing T, Cole C, et al.: Circular mapping and ablation of the pulmonary vein for treatment of atrial fibrillation: impact of different catheter technologies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 40:464–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hsieh MH, Tai CT, Tsai CF, et al.: Clinical outcome of very late recurrence of atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003, 14:598–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saad EB, Rossillo A, Saad CP, et al.: Pulmonary vein stenosis after radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: functional characterization, evolution, and influence of ablation strategy. Circulation 2003, 108:3102–3107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pappone C, Rosanio S, Augello G, et al.: Mortality, morbidity, and quality of life after circumferential pulmonary vein ablation for atrial fibrillation: outcomes from a controlled nonrandomized long-term study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:185–197. Study that suggests that rhythm control with a catheter-based strategy may prove to be superior to drug-based strategies, and possibly comparable with maze surgery.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Oral H, Scharf C, Chugh A, et al.: Catheter ablation for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Segmental ostial ablation versus left atrial ablation. Circulation 2003, 108:2355–2360.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Van Gelder IC, Crijns HJ, Tieleman RG, et al.: Chronic atrial fibrillation. Success of serial cardioversion therapy and safety of oral anticoagulation. Arch Intern Med 1996, 156:2585–2592.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Blackshear JL, Odell JA: Appendage obliteration to reduce stroke in cardiac surgical patients with atrial fibrillation. Ann Thorac Surg 1996, 61:755–759. Summary of thrombus location in AF.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Blackshear JL, Johnson WD, Odell JA, et al.: Thoracoscopic extracardiac obliteration of the left atrial appendage for stroke risk reduction in atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42:1249–1252.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Crystal E, Lamy A, Connolly SJ, et al.: Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Study (LAAOS): a randomized clinical trial of left atrial appendage occlusion during routine coronary artery bypass graft surgery for long-term stroke prevention. Am Heart J 2003, 145:174–178.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Meier B, Palacios I, Windecker S, et al.: Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion with Amplatzer devices to obviate anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003, 60:417–422.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sievert H, Lesh MD, Trepels T, et al.: Percutaneous left atrial appendage transcatheter occlusion to prevent stroke in highrisk patients with atrial fibrillation: early clinical experience. Circulation 2002, 105:1887–1889.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Omran H, Hardung D, Schmidt H, et al.: Mechanical occlusion of the left atrial appendage. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003, 14(9 Suppl):S56-S59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph L. Blackshear
    • 1
  • Fred Kusumoto
    • 1
  1. 1.Mayo Clinic-JacksonvilleJacksonvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations