Triple vs Dual Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Coronary Artery Disease

Abstract Background The role of triple antithrombotic therapy vs dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with both atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease remains unclear. This study explores the differences in treatment practices and outcomes between triple antithrombotic therapy and dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease. Methods Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (n = 10,135), we analyzed outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 1827) according to treatment with triple antithrombotic therapy (defined as concurrent therapy with an oral anticoagulant, a thienopyridine, and aspirin) or dual antithrombotic therapy (comprising either an oral anticoagulant and one antiplatelet agent [OAC plus AA] or 2 antiplatelet drugs and no anticoagulant [DAP]). Results The use of triple antithrombotic therapy, OAC plus AA, and DAP at baseline was 8.5% (n = 155), 80.4% (n = 1468), and 11.2% (n = 204), respectively. Among patients treated with OAC plus AA, aspirin was the most common antiplatelet agent used (90%), followed by clopidogrel (10%) and prasugrel (0.1%). The use of triple antithrombotic therapy was not affected by patient risk of either stroke or bleeding. Patients treated with triple antithrombotic therapy at baseline were hospitalized for all causes (including cardiovascular) more often than patients on OAC plus AA (adjusted hazard ratio 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.26; P