Eligibility and Preference of New Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Comparison Between Patients With Versus Without Stroke

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE—Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have evaluated the benefit of new oral anticoagulants in reducing the risk of vascular events and bleeding complications in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, abundant and strict enrollment criteria may limit the validity and applicability of results of RCTs to clinical practice. We estimated the eligibility for participation in RCTs of an unselected group of patients with AF. In addition, we compared features favoring new oral anticoagulant use between patients with versus without stroke. Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy METHODS—We applied enrollment criteria of 4 RCTs (RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, ARISTOTLE, and ENGAGE-AF-TIMI 48) to 695 patients with AF taking warfarin, prospectively and consecutively collected at a university medical center; 500 patients with and 195 patients without stroke. Time in therapeutic range and bleeding risk scheme (anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation) were also measured. RESULTS—The proportions of patients fulfilling the trial enrollment criteria varied, ranging from 39% to 72.8%, depending on the differences in indications/contraindications among studies and presence/absence of stroke. The main reasons for ineligibility for RCTs were hemorrhagic risk (anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation [ATRIA] score) (10.8%–40.5%) and planned cardioversion (5.1%–7.7%) for nonstroke patients, and a low creatinine clearance (5.6%–9.2%) and higher risk of bleeding (15.2%–20.8%) for patients with stroke. When compared with nonstroke patients, patients with stroke showed a lower time in therapeutic range (54.4±42.8% versus 65.4±34.9%, especially with severe disability) and a high hemorrhagic risk (ATRIA score) (3.06±2.30 versus 2.18±2.16) (P