Embolism

Importance: Data from randomized clinical trials on a long-term anticoagulation strategy for patients after catheter-based ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) are lacking.

Objective: To evaluate whether discontinuing oral anticoagulant therapy provides superior clinical outcomes compared with continuing oral anticoagulant therapy in patients without documented atrial arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation for AF.

Design, setting, and participants: A randomized clinical trial including 840 adult patients (aged 19-80 years) who were enrolled and randomized from July 28, 2020, to March 9, 2023, at 18 hospitals in South Korea. Enrolled patients had at least 1 non-sex-related stroke risk factor (determined using the CHA2DS2-VASc score [range, 0-9]) and no documented recurrence of atrial arrhythmia for at least 1 year after catheter ablation for AF. The CHA2DS2-VASc score is used as an assessment of stroke risk among patients with AF (calculated using point values for congestive heart failure, hypertension, ≥75 years of age, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, between 65 and 74 years of age, and sex category). The date of final follow-up was June 4, 2025.

Interventions: The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy (n = 417) or continue oral anticoagulant therapy (with direct oral anticoagulants; n = 423).

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding at 2 years. Individual components of the primary outcome (such as ischemic stroke and major bleeding) were assessed as secondary outcomes.

Results: Of the 840 adults randomized, the mean age was 64 (SD, 8) years, 24.9% were women, the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2.1 (SD, 1.0), and 67.6% had paroxysmal AF. At 2 years, the primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.3%) in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 8 patients (2.2%) in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -1.9 percentage points [95% CI, -3.5 to -0.3]; P = .02). The 2-year cumulative incidence of ischemic stroke was 0.3% in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 0.8% in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -0.5 percentage points [95% CI, -1.6 to 0.6]). Major bleeding occurred in 0 patients in the discontinue oral anticoagulant therapy group vs 5 patients (1.4%) in the continue oral anticoagulant therapy group (absolute difference, -1.4 percentage points [95% CI, -2.6 to -0.2]).

Conclusions and relevance: Among patients without documented atrial arrhythmia recurrence after catheter ablation for AF, discontinuing oral anticoagulant therapy resulted in a lower risk for the composite outcome of stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding vs continuing direct oral anticoagulant therapy.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04432220.

Author/s:

Daehoon Kim, MD, Jaemin Shim, MD, Eue-Keun Choi, MD

Aspirin in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndrome Receiving Oral Anticoagulation

Megan George — Tue, 02 Sep 2025 13:36:10 +0000

Date Added:

September 2, 2025

Journal/Publication:

New England Journal of Medicine

Publication Date:

August 30, 2025

URL:

Aspirin in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndrome Receiving Oral Anticoagulation

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1056/NEJMoa2507532

Keywords

Chronic Coronary Syndrome

Oral Anticoagulation

aspirin

atherothrombotic risk

stent implantation

PMID (1):

40888725

MeSH

aspirin

Fibrinolytic Agents

follow-up studies

Clinical Trials Data Monitoring Committees

Confidence Intervals

random allocation

myocardial infarction

coronary artery disease

In patients with high-risk CAD already on an anticoagulant, the addition of aspirin increases the risk of adverse events. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

Background: The appropriate antithrombotic regimen for patients with chronic coronary syndrome who are at high atherothrombotic risk and receiving long-term oral anticoagulation remains unknown.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in France involving patients with chronic coronary syndrome who had undergone a previous stent implantation (>6 months before enrollment) and were at high atherothrombotic risk and currently receiving long-term oral anticoagulation. The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive aspirin (100 mg once daily) or placebo; all the patients continued to receive their current oral anticoagulation therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, coronary revascularization, or acute limb ischemia. The key safety outcome was major bleeding.

Results: A total of 872 patients underwent randomization; 433 were assigned to the aspirin group, and 439 to the placebo group. The trial was stopped early at the advice of the independent data and safety monitoring board after a median follow-up of 2.2 years because of an excess of deaths from any cause in the aspirin group. A primary efficacy outcome event occurred in 73 patients (16.9%) in the aspirin group and in 53 patients (12.1%) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07 to 2.18; P = 0.02). Death from any cause occurred in 58 patients (13.4%) in the aspirin group and in 37 (8.4%) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.58; P = 0.01). Major bleeding occurred in 44 patients (10.2%) in the aspirin group and in 15 patients (3.4%) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.87 to 6.00; P<0.001). A total of 467 and 395 serious adverse events were reported in the aspirin group and placebo group, respectively.

Conclusions: Among patients with chronic coronary syndrome at high atherothrombotic risk who were receiving an oral anticoagulant, the addition of aspirin led to a higher risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, coronary revascularization, or acute limb ischemia than placebo, as well as higher risks of death from any cause and major bleeding. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Bayer Healthcare; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04217447.).

Author/s:

Gilles Lemesle, M.D., Ph.D., Romain Didier, M.D., Ph.D., Philippe Gabriel Steg, M.D., Tabassome Simon, M.D., Ph.D., Gilles Montalescot, M.D., Ph.D., Nicolas Danchin, M.D., Christophe Bauters, M.D., Ph.D.

Patent Foramen Ovale and Stroke A Review

Hope Smashey — Tue, 29 Jul 2025 17:14:31 +0000

Date Added:

July 29, 2025

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

July 28, 2025

URL:

Patent Foramen Ovale and Stroke A Review

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2025.10946

Keywords

Congenital Defects

pediatrics

female

PMID (1):

40720119

MeSH

Apparently patent foramen ovale is a lot more common than many of us thought they were and an important cause of embolic strokes. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: A patent foramen ovale (PFO), an opening between the right and left atria during normal fetal development that fails to close after birth, is present in approximately 25% of all adults. Paradoxical embolism, a venous thromboembolism that travels to the systemic circulation typically through a PFO, accounts for about 5% of all strokes and 10% of strokes in younger patients.

Observations: Approximately 50% of patients 60 years or younger with an embolic stroke of undetermined source (cryptogenic stroke) have a PFO, compared with 25% of the general population. The Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score incorporates clinical characteristics (age, history of stroke or transient ischemic attack, diabetes, hypertension, smoking, cortical infarct on imaging) to predict the likelihood that embolic stroke of undetermined source was caused by a PFO. Among patients in the lowest RoPE score category (score <3), PFO prevalence was similar to that in the general population (23%), while PFO prevalence was 77% in patients with a RoPE score of 9 or 10. The PFO-Associated Stroke Causal Likelihood (PASCAL) classification system combines the RoPE score and anatomical criteria from echocardiography (large shunt, atrial septal aneurysm) to classify PFO as the “probable,” “possible,” or “unlikely” cause of otherwise cryptogenic stroke. PFO closure reduces recurrent ischemic stroke in patients 60 years or younger with cryptogenic stroke. In a pooled analysis of 6 trials (3740 patients), the annualized incidence of stroke over a median follow-up of 57 months was 0.47% (95% CI, 0.35%-0.65%) with PFO closure vs 1.09% (95% CI, 0.88%-1.36%) with medical therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.28-0.60]). However, the benefits and harms of closure were highly heterogeneous across the trial populations. In patients categorized as PASCAL “probable” (ie, younger patients without vascular risk factors and high-risk PFO anatomical features), there was a 90% decreased relative rate of recurrent ischemic stroke after PFO closure at 2 years (hazard ratio, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03-0.35]; absolute risk reduction, 2.1% [95% CI, 0.9%-3.4%]). PASCAL “unlikely” patients (eg, older patients with vascular risk factors and no high-risk PFO anatomical features) did not have a lower recurrent stroke rate with PFO closure but had higher risk of procedure- and device-related adverse events, such as atrial fibrillation.

Conclusions and Relevance: Patent foramen ovale is present in approximately 25% of all adults and is a common cause of stroke in young and middle-aged patients. The PASCAL classification system can help guide patient selection for PFO closure. Percutaneous PFO closure substantially reduces the risk of stroke recurrence in well-selected patients younger than 60 years after cryptogenic stroke.

Author/s:

David M. Kent, Andy Y. Wang