BackgroundWhether non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are superior to warfarin among Asians with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation remains unclear.Methods and ResultsIn this nationwide retrospective cohort study collected from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, there were 5843, 20 079, 27 777, and 19 375 nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients taking apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and warfarin, respectively, from June 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016. Propensity‐score weighting was used to balance covariates across study groups. Patients were followed until the first occurrence of any efficacy or safety outcome or the end date of study. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban with warfarin were: ischemic stroke/systemic embolism (IS/SE), 0.55 (0.43–0.69), 0.82 (0.68–0.98), and 0.81 (0.67–0.97); major bleeding, 0.41 (0.31–0.53), 0.65 (0.53–0.80), and 0.58 (0.46–0.72); and all‐cause mortality, 0.58 (0.51–0.66), 0.61 (0.54–0.68), and 0.57 (0.51–0.65). A total of 3623 (62%), 17 760 (88%), and 26 000 (94%) patients were taking low‐dose apixaban (2.5 mg twice daily), dabigatran (110 mg twice daily), and rivaroxaban (10–15 mg once daily), respectively. Similar to all‐dose NOACs, all low‐dose NOACs had lower risk of IS/SE, major bleeding, and mortality when compared with warfarin. In contrast to other standard‐dose NOACs, apixaban was associated with lower risks of IS/SE (0.45 [0.31–0.65]), major bleeding (0.29 [0.18–0.46]), and mortality (0.23 [0.17–0.31]) than warfarin.ConclusionsAll NOACs were associated with lower risk of IS/SE, major bleeding, and mortality compared with warfarin in the largest real‐world practice among Asians with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. All low‐dose NOACs had lower risk of IS/SE, major bleeding, and mortality when compared with warfarin. Standard‐dose apixaban caused a lower risk of IS/SE, major bleeding, and mortality compared with warfarin.

BackgroundPatients with impaired liver function (ILF) were excluded from clinical trials that investigated non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOACs in atrial fibrillation patients with ILF.Methods and ResultsA cohort study based on electronic medical records was conducted from 2009 to 2016 at a multicenter healthcare provider in Taiwan and included 6451 anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients (aged 76.7±7.0 years, 52.5% male). Patients were classified into 2 subgroups: patients with normal liver function (n=5818) and patients with ILF (n=633, 9.8%). Cox regression analysis was performed to investigate the risks of thromboembolism, bleeding, and death associated with use of NOACs and warfarin in patients with normal liver function and ILF, respectively. In patients with normal liver function, compared with warfarin therapy (n=2928), NOAC therapy (n=4048) was associated with significantly lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.88; P<0.001) and death (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–0.80; P<0.001) with no difference in major bleeding or gastrointestinal bleeding. In patients with ILF, compared with warfarin therapy (n=394), NOAC therapy (n=342) was associated with significantly lower risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.49–0.83; P<0.001), but no difference in stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, or gastrointestinal bleeding.ConclusionsIn atrial fibrillation patients with ILF, NOAC therapy and warfarin therapy were associated with similar risks of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and gastrointestinal bleeding.

Background Surgery for tricuspid valve ( TV ) diseases is associated with poor prognosis, but few studies have described the long‐term outcomes by comparing TV repair and replacement in isolated and concomitant TV surgeries separately. Methods and Results Between 2000 and 2013, adult patients who underwent TV repair or replacement surgeries were identified from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Outcomes of interest included all‐cause mortality, composite outcome, and readmission attributable to any cause. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to reduce confounding effects. A total of 2644 patients with a mean follow‐up of 4.9 years were included. Of them, 12.6% and 87.4% underwent isolated and concomitant TV surgery, respectively. The in‐hospital mortality rates for isolated and concomitant TV surgery were 8.7% and 8.6%, respectively, whereas all‐cause mortality rates were 41.7% and 36.8%, respectively. Compared with TV replacement, TV repair demonstrated significantly lower risks of all‐cause mortality (concomitant: hazard ratio [ HR ], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59–0.99), composite outcome (isolated: subdistribution HR , 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35–0.89; concomitant: subdistribution HR , 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46–0.86), and readmission (isolated: subdistribution HR , 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46–0.91; concomitant: subdistribution HR , 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60–0.86), except insignificant difference in all‐cause mortality in isolated surgery. Conclusions Compared with replacement, TV repair is associated with better short‐ and long‐term outcomes in both isolated and concomitant TV surgery. However, further prospective clinical trials are warranted.

BackgroundThe ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) evaluated rivaroxaban (20/15 mg/d) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. A separate trial, J‐ROCKET AF (Japanese ROCKET AF), compared rivaroxaban (15/10 mg/d) and warfarin in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation. Data about rivaroxaban following J‐ROCKET AF criteria compared with warfarin and ROCKET AF dosage were limited.Methods and ResultsThis retrospective study used medical data from a multicenter healthcare provider in Taiwan that included 3162 patients taking rivaroxaban. Among 2320 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥50 mL/min per 1.73 m2, 384 and 1936 patients followed the ROCKET AF (20 mg/d) and J‐ROCKET AF (15 mg/d) recommendation, respectively. Among 842 patients with an eGFR <50 mL/min per 1.73 m2, 422 and 420 patients followed the ROCKET AF (15 mg/d) and J‐ROCKET AF (10 mg/d) recommendation, respectively. A total of 2053 patients with atrial fibrillation receiving warfarin were identified. Rivaroxaban following either ROCKET AF or J‐ROCKET AF dosage criteria was associated with a comparable risk of thromboembolism but a lower risk of bleeding than warfarin. For patients with an eGFR ≥50 mL/min per 1.73 m2, risks of clinical events did not differ significantly between the 2 dosage criteria of rivaroxaban. For patients with an eGFR <50 mL/min per 1.73 m2, the ROCKET AF dosage was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding compared with the J‐ROCKET AF dosage (hazard ratio, 2.70; P=0.0445) without significant differences regarding the risk of ischemic events.ConclusionsIn Asian patients with atrial fibrillation, the J‐ROCKET AF dosage was as effective as the ROCKET AF dosage irrespective of renal function. The risk of major bleeding was lower with the J‐ROCKET AF dosage in patients with an eGFR <50 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Compared with warfarin, rivaroxaban following either dosage criteria was effective and even safer.