Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026
Withholding Oral Anticoagulation at Discharge and Post-Discharge Stroke and Bleeding Vulnerability in a Predominantly Older Cohort Hospitalized With Acute Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yamamoto Jumpei, Nakamura Keijiro, Hayama Hiromasa, Enomoto Yoshinari, Yamamoto Masaya, Hara Hidehiko, Hara Hisao, Hiroi Yukio
Аннотация
AIM: In older adults hospitalized with acute heart failure and atrial fibrillation, bleeding concern often drives withholding of oral anticoagulation at discharge. Whether withholding marks a genuinely lower bleeding-risk phenotype or residual clinical vulnerability is uncertain. We examined its association with post-discharge ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and death in a predominantly older cohort.
METHODS: We analyzed a registry of patients hospitalized with acute heart failure and atrial fibrillation. In a discharge-based analysis of patients discharged alive and free of stroke or major bleeding at discharge, we used stabilized inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting for discharge anticoagulation. Ischemic stroke and major bleeding were modeled with weighted Fine-Gray competing-risk regression (death as competing event) and death with weighted Cox regression, contrasting no anticoagulant versus anticoagulant. Age-restricted analyses (≥ 75, ≥ 80 years) and absolute risks were prespecified.
RESULTS: Among 560 patients (no anticoagulant 72, anticoagulant 488; mean age 78 years), withholding was associated with higher ischemic stroke (subdistribution hazard ratio 3.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-7.81) and did not identify a lower bleeding-risk phenotype, with numerically higher major bleeding overall (1.98, 0.95-4.14) that reached significance among patients aged ≥ 80 years (2.41, 1.05-5.54). No significant association with death was observed (hazard ratio 1.34, 0.70-2.55). Three-year cumulative incidences of bleeding were 25.6% (no anticoagulant) versus 13.4% (anticoagulant).
CONCLUSION: Discharge anticoagulation withholding did not identify a lower post-discharge bleeding-risk phenotype but marked residual thromboembolic vulnerability, with a higher bleeding-risk trajectory, particularly among patients aged ≥ 80 years, supporting structured post-discharge anticoagulation reassessment in older adults.
METHODS: We analyzed a registry of patients hospitalized with acute heart failure and atrial fibrillation. In a discharge-based analysis of patients discharged alive and free of stroke or major bleeding at discharge, we used stabilized inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting for discharge anticoagulation. Ischemic stroke and major bleeding were modeled with weighted Fine-Gray competing-risk regression (death as competing event) and death with weighted Cox regression, contrasting no anticoagulant versus anticoagulant. Age-restricted analyses (≥ 75, ≥ 80 years) and absolute risks were prespecified.
RESULTS: Among 560 patients (no anticoagulant 72, anticoagulant 488; mean age 78 years), withholding was associated with higher ischemic stroke (subdistribution hazard ratio 3.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-7.81) and did not identify a lower bleeding-risk phenotype, with numerically higher major bleeding overall (1.98, 0.95-4.14) that reached significance among patients aged ≥ 80 years (2.41, 1.05-5.54). No significant association with death was observed (hazard ratio 1.34, 0.70-2.55). Three-year cumulative incidences of bleeding were 25.6% (no anticoagulant) versus 13.4% (anticoagulant).
CONCLUSION: Discharge anticoagulation withholding did not identify a lower post-discharge bleeding-risk phenotype but marked residual thromboembolic vulnerability, with a higher bleeding-risk trajectory, particularly among patients aged ≥ 80 years, supporting structured post-discharge anticoagulation reassessment in older adults.