|
Title
|
|
|
|
Uninterrupted oral anticoagulation versus bridging in patients with long-term oral anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention : subgroup analysis from the WOEST trial
| |
|
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Institution/Organisation
|
|
|
|
WOEST Study Investigators
| |
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| Aims: To investigate the optimal periprocedural antithrombotic strategy in patients on long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) who require percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. Methods and results: The WOEST study was a randomised controlled trial which recruited 573 patients on long-term OAC who underwent PCI. The periprocedural treatment strategy was left to the operator's discretion. To assess the safety and feasibility of uninterrupted oral anticoagulation (UAC) and bridging therapy (BT), bleeding complications and MACCE were assessed in patients treated according to UAC (n=241) and BT (n=322) regimen. After 30 days, as well as after one year, there were no significant differences in bleeding complications (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.77-1.69, p=0.51, and HR 1.26, 95% CI: 0.94-1.69, p=0.12, respectively) and MACCE. MACCE tended to be less frequent in the UAC group (respectively HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.15-1.51, p=0.21, and HR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.46-1.14, p=0.16). Additionally, adjustment with a propensity score revealed no significant differences. Periprocedural INR was not associated with bleeding or MACCE. Conclusions: In the WOEST study, UAC was not associated with an increase of bleeding or MACCE compared to bridging therapy. This is the largest study up to now to support the current guidelines. The WOEST trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00769938. |
| |
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
EuroIntervention
| |
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
2015
| |
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
1774-024X
| |
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.4244/EIJY14M06_07
| |
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
11
:4
(2015)
, p. 381-390
| |
|
ISI
|
|
|
|
000361853800006
| |
|
Pubmed ID
|
|
|
|
24970794
| |
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|