Abstract:Background Antithrombotic treatment with oral anticoagulants is recommended in clinical practice guidelines for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and concurrent atrial fibrillation (AF). Previous randomized controlled trials comparing warfarin and DOAC have primarily focused on bleeding complications. Consequently, the benefits and risks in an all-comer population remain uncertain. Purpose This study aimed to evaluate adherence to clinical practice guidelines within a large nationwide cohort and to compare outcomes among patients with MI and AF who were treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), Warfarin, or DOAC. Method We utilized data from the nationwide SWEDEHEART registry to identify all patients with MI and AF between January 2010 and January 2021. We included all patients who underwent PCI and had a CHA2DS2-VASC score of ≥2 for men and ≥3 for women. The follow-up was one year. Patients were allocated into one of three antithrombotic treatment groups based on discharge medications: (1) Warfarin-based, (2) DOAC-based, and (3) DAPT only. The warfarin- and DOAC-based groups comprised patients on either dual or triple antithrombotic therapy. Study outcomes included: (1) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, MI, or stroke; (2) net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE), which included MACE and bleeding complications; and (3) the individual components of MACE and NACE. Cox regression models were used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics. Results Mean age among the 12,321 patients included was 76.1 years. At discharge, 3,563 (29%) were treated with warfarin, 3,671 (30%) received DOAC treatment, and 5,087 (41%) with DAPT alone. The percentage of patients treated with OAC increased from 30% in 2010 to 84% in 2021. Warfarin- and DOAC-based strategies were associated with lower MACE compared to DAPT alone, with adjusted hazard ratios [HR] (95% CI) of 0.77 (0.69-0.97) and 0.78 (0.69-0.90), respectively, as well as lower rates of NACE with adjusted [HR] (95% CI) of 0.84 (0.76-0.93) 0.84 (0.75-0.94), respectively. This difference was primarily driven by a difference in mortality, with adjusted ]HR] (95% CI) of 0.78 (0.67-0.91) and 0.80 (0.68-0.94), respectively. There were significantly fewer stroke events in the DOAC group (2.5 % vs 3.3%) compared with DAPT. No significant differences in bleeding events were observed between any of the treatment groups. Conclusions In this real-life retrospective study, we observed an increased utilization of guideline recommended OAC treatment over time. Both DOAC and warfarin treatment regimens were associated with a lower incidence of MACE and NACE compared to DAPT alone. No significant difference in outcomes were observed comparing DOAC vs Warfarin.

Anticoagulation Usage and Thrombolytic Therapy in Subjects with Atrial Fibrillation Associated Ischaemic Stroke.

Changes in anticoagulation practice in subjects admitted with stroke associated with atrial fibrillation, following introduction of direct oral anticoagulants over 2013-2021

Undertreatment of Anticoagulant Therapy in Hospitalized Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Trends over time in oral anticoagulation and stroke rates in atrial fibrillation: A community-based study

Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists after recent ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation

Ischemic Stroke despite Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of stroke in AF with arterial origin stroke: a meta-analysis.

Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: assessing net clinical benefit

Aetiology, secondary prevention strategies and outcomes of ischaemic stroke despite oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation

Abstract TP197: Early Direct Oral Anticoagulants Therapy After Ischemic Stroke In Patients With And Without Atrial Fibrillation:A Pooled Analysis Of Five Studies

Abstract 97: Acute Ischemic Stroke Despite Anticoagulant Use: The Neuro-AFib Study

Antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation after myocardial infarction and percutaneous coronary intervention

Secular Trends in Outcomes and Impact of Novel Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation–Related Acute Ischemic Stroke

Association of preceding antithrombotic treatment with acute ischemic stroke severity and in-hospital outcomes among patients with atrial fibrillation

Plateauing atrial fibrillation burden in acute ischemic stroke admissions in the United States from 2010 to 2020

Abstract WP144: Early Initiation of Anticoagulation is Safe After Ischemic Stroke With Atrial Fibrillation, Meta-Analysis and Systemic Review

Abstract WP19: Is Direct Oral Anticoagulant More Effective Than Warfarin to Reduce Size of Left Atrial Thrombus in Stroke Patients?

Patient Perspectives on Factors Affecting Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

What if a Patient with Atrial Fibrillation and Anticoagulant Treatment is Suffering from Acute Ischemia Stroke

Limitations of Oral Anticoagulants in Preventing Stroke Recurrence in Atrial Fibrillation

A Comparison of Oral Anticoagulant Use for Atrial Fibrillation in the Pre- and Post-DOAC Eras