Real-World Management Strategies of Anticoagulated Atrial Fibrillation Patients After a Clinically Significant...

Systemic anticoagulation for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) carries inherent bleeding risks, and determining whether and when to resume anticoagulation after significant bleeding is a common dilemma. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of AF patients discharged after a bleeding event, document real-life thromboembolic prevention strategy (TPS), and analyse their associated clinical outcomes.

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of anticoagulated AF patients admitted for bleeding from 2017 to 2019.

A total of 140 patients were included, with a mean age of 78.6 years. Four discharge groups were defined: 75 patients (53.5%) had optimal anticoagulation (OA), 37 (26.4%) had a suboptimal antithrombotic regimen (SAR; low-dose direct oral anticoagulants without dose-reduction criteria or antiplatelet therapy), 10 (7.1%) were referred for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO), and 18 (12.9%) left without any TPS. All-cause mortality at 2 years was high (28.6%) but not statistically different between groups (P = 0.71). Patients discharged with a TPS (OA/SAR/LAAO referral) were more likely to be readmitted for bleeding at 2 years (34% vs 0%; P = 0.002), and those discharged without a TPS had higher rates of stroke (16.6% vs 1.4%; P = 0.003). SAR yielded readmission rates for bleeding similar to resumption of OA (27% vs 34.7%; P = 0.41) but was associated with high rates of death or readmission at 2 years.

This real-life cohort reveals that clinicians frequently downgrade or discontinue long-term thromboembolic protection after a bleeding event despite current guideline recommendations to the contrary, and downgrading resulted in bleeding risk similar to OA.