BackgroundROCKET AF and its East Asian subanalysis demonstrated that rivaroxaban was non‐inferior to warfarin for stroke/systemic embolism (SE) prevention in patients with non‐valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), with a favorable benefit–risk profile. XANAP investigated the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban in routine care in Asia‐Pacific.MethodsXANAP was a prospective, real‐world, observational study in patients with NVAF newly starting rivaroxaban. Patients were followed at ~3‐month intervals for 1 year, or for ≥30 days after permanent discontinuation. Primary outcomes were major bleeding events, adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and all‐cause mortality; secondary outcomes included stroke/SE. Major outcomes were adjudicated centrally.ResultsXANAP enrolled 2273 patients from 10 countries: mean age was 70.5 years and 58.1% were male. 49.8% of patients received rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (od), 43.8% 15 mg od and 5.9% 10 mg od. Mean treatment duration was 296 days, and 72.8% of patients had received prior anticoagulation therapy. Co‐morbidities included heart failure (20.1%), hypertension (73.6%), diabetes mellitus (26.6%), prior stroke/non‐central nervous system SE/transient ischemic attack (32.8%) and myocardial infarction (3.8%). Mean CHADS2, CHA2DS2‐VASc and HAS‐BLED scores were 2.3, 3.7 and 2.1, respectively. The rates (events/100 patient‐years [95% confidence interval]) of treatment‐emergent major bleeding, stroke and all‐cause mortality were 1.5 (1.0‐2.1), 1.7 (1.2‐2.5) and 2.0 (1.4‐2.7), respectively. Persistence was 66.2% at the study end.ConclusionsThe real‐world XANAP study demonstrated low rates of stroke and bleeding in rivaroxaban‐treated patients with NVAF from Asia‐Pacific. The results were consistent with the real‐world XANTUS study and ROCKET AF.

No abstract

We found that patients selected for ECR with ischemic core size ≥70ml had clinical outcomes not significantly different compared with those with smaller ischemic cores. We recommend that large ischemic core size alone does not necessarily constitute an absolute contraindication for ECR. Randomized controlled studies are needed to better define the benefits for this group of patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

No abstract