No abstract available.
Defibrillators ; Defibrillators, Implantable* ; Jugular Veins*

Background/Aims: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) risk for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with warfarin is largely unknown. We aimed to determine the risk of overall and post-polypectomy GIB for NOACs and warfarin. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance database, we created a cohort of patients who were newly prescribed NOACs or warfarin between July 2015 and December 2017 using propensity score matching (PSM). Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test was performed to compare the risk of overall and post-polypectomy GIB between NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban) and warfarin. Post-polypectomy GIB was defined as bleeding within 1 month after gastrointestinal endoscopic polypectomy. Results: Out of 234,206 patients taking anticoagulants (187,687 NOACs and 46,519 warfarin), we selected 39,764 pairs of NOACs and warfarin users after PSM. NOACs patients showed significantly lower risk of overall GIB than warfarin patients (log-rank P<0.001, hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.78–0.94; P=0.001). Among NOACs, apixaban showed the lowest risk of GIB. In the subgroup of 7,525 patients who underwent gastrointestinal polypectomy (lower gastrointestinal polypectomy 93.1%), 1,546 pairs were chosen for each group after PSM. The NOACs group showed a high risk of post-polypectomy GIB compared with the warfarin group (log-rank P=0.001, hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.16–3.33; P=0.012). Conclusions This nationwide, population-based study demonstrates that risk of overall GIB is lower for NOACs than for warfarin, while risk of post-polypectomy GIB is higher for NOACs than for warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantations have a relatively low rate of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in patients with off-label use. However, the clinical outcome in the Korean population regarding EES in patients with off-label use is not well known. OBJECTS: The aim of the current analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of on-label and off-label EES use over a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS: Using patient-level data from a stent-specific, prospective, all-comer registry, we evaluated 987 patients (1,342 lesions) who received an EES (XIENCE V®, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) implantation between February 2009 and April 2011. The primary outcome was assessed: 2-year MACE (a composite endpoint of death from any cause, spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI), and any repeat revascularization). The clinical outcomes in the on- and off-label groups were compared at 2 years. RESULTS: The majority of patients (79.0%) were treated for ≥1 off-label indication. The median duration of the clinical follow-up in the overall population was 2.0 years (interquartile range 1.9–2.1). At 2-years after the EES implantation in the enrolled patients, MACE occurred in 71 (7.9%) patients, cardiac death in 12 (1.3%), MI in 4 (0.5%), target vessel revascularization (TVR) in 33 (3.8%), TLR in 22 (2.5%), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST) in 1 (0.1%). Off-label EES implantations tend to increase the risk of 2-year MACE (4.7% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.063) without statistical significance. However, the rates of TLR were higher in the off-label EES implantations (0.0% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.013). In the multivariable analysis, renal failure, previous bypass surgery, previous cerebrovascular accident, and left main lesions were associated with 2-year MACE in patients with EES implantations. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of 2-year MACE was 7.9%, which that might be acceptable in all-comer patients treated with EES implantations. Although the off-label use of EES was not statistically associated with an increased risk of MACE, the TLR rate was higher in the off-label group, suggesting that physicians need to pay attention to high risk patients with the use of EES implantations.
Coronary Artery Disease ; Death ; Drug-Eluting Stents* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Myocardial Infarction ; Off-Label Use ; Prospective Studies ; Renal Insufficiency ; Stents* ; Stroke ; Thrombosis