Anticoagulation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation
For patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation should be prescribed for those with one or more non-sex CHA₂DS₂-VASc stroke risk factors, with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) preferred over warfarin in eligible patients. 1, 2
Risk Assessment and Initial Decision-Making
- Use the CHA₂DS₂-VASc score for stroke risk stratification, which includes congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years (doubled), diabetes mellitus, prior stroke/TIA (doubled), vascular disease, age 65-74, and sex category 1, 2
- No antithrombotic therapy is recommended for patients at low risk (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score = 0 in males, 1 in females) 1, 2
- Oral anticoagulation is recommended for patients with intermediate risk (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score = 1 in males) and high risk (CHA₂DS₂-VASc score ≥ 2) 1, 2
- Bleeding risk assessment should be performed for all patients with AF at every patient contact, focusing on potentially modifiable risk factors 1, 2
Choice of Anticoagulant
- DOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban) are preferred over warfarin for non-valvular atrial fibrillation 2
- Dabigatran 150 mg twice daily is suggested over adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonist therapy 2, 3
- DOACs have demonstrated a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage compared to warfarin 2
- For patients with mitral stenosis or mechanical heart valves, adjusted-dose warfarin is recommended with a target INR of 2.5 (range 2.0-3.0) 2, 4
Special Considerations
- DOACs require dose adjustment based on renal function:
- Warfarin is preferred for patients on dialysis 2
- DOACs are not recommended for patients with triple-positive antiphospholipid syndrome (positive for lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin, and anti-beta 2-glycoprotein I antibodies) 3
Common Pitfalls to Avoid
- Using antiplatelet therapy alone when oral anticoagulation is indicated - antiplatelet therapy provides only modest protection (22% risk reduction) compared to oral anticoagulation (62% risk reduction) 2, 5
- Discontinuing anticoagulation after cardioversion or ablation in patients with ongoing stroke risk factors 2
- Overestimating bleeding risk leading to inappropriate withholding of anticoagulation 2
- Inadequate INR control (target 2.0-3.0) when using warfarin, which reduces both safety and effectiveness 2, 4
Monitoring and Follow-up
- For patients on warfarin, maintain INR between 2.0-3.0 for non-valvular AF 4
- For patients with mechanical heart valves, target INR depends on valve type and position:
- Regular assessment of bleeding risk using validated tools like HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/alcohol) 6, 7
- A HAS-BLED score ≥3 indicates high bleeding risk requiring careful monitoring, but does not contraindicate anticoagulation 7