Objective: Left atrial size is an important marker for adverse cardiovascular events. There is general consensus that left atrial volume index (LAVI) is the best measurement of size. The current LAVI measurement techniques are laborious. Semi-automated measurement with a 3-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) system may be a practical clinical alternative to measure LAVI, but it has not been adequately evaluated against Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) gold standard. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of a commercially available 3D algorithm for measurement of LAVI against LAVI obtained from MRI and Area Length Method (ALM). Design:In 27 consecutive subjects referred for cardiac MRI (age 54 ± 13 years, 63% male), LAVI was measured using 3 imaging modalities: 3DE, ALM, MRI and the results were correlated. ALM was measured using standard American Society of Echocardiography guidelines. The time required to measure LAVI by 3DE and ALM were compared.Results: There was a significant correlation in systolic and diastolic LA volumes and left atrial ejection fraction between 3DE and MRI (r = 0.86 for systole, r = 0.76 for diastole, r = 0.88 for ejection fraction, P < 0.0001 for all). There was also significant correlation of diastolic volumes between 3DE and ALM (r = 0.77, P < 0.0001). The time to obtain LAVI was shorter using 3DE versus ALM (56 ± 8 vs 135 ± 55 seconds, P < 0.0001). Conclusion:Three-dimensional echocardiography with semiautomatic border detection is a practical alternative for obtaining the left atrial volume in a time-efficient manner compared to the current standard.

Background The ability to assess the hemostatic effect of the direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) may be valuable in clinical situations such as bleeding or thrombosis, before urgent surgery, or reversal of anticoagulation. We sought to assess the anticoagulant effect of DOACs with the new‐generation fully automated thrombelastograph TEG 6s using resonance‐frequency viscoelasticity measurements and disposable multichannel microfluidic cartridges. Methods A single dose of oral dabigatran 150 mg, rivaroxaban 20 mg, or apixaban 5 mg was given to 9 healthy males. Phlebotomy was performed at 0, 1, and 3 hours after administration of DOAC. TEG parameters were measured using TEG_6s. Concentrations of DOACs were measured using chromogenic assays. The TEG parameters were correlated to the DOAC concentrations. Results The reaction time (R) demonstrated the strongest response to DOAC intake. There were no correlations between other TEG parameters and DOAC concentrations. Using the direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) channel, R was significantly correlated with dabigatran levels (r = 0.94, P < 0.0001). Using the anti–factor Xa (AFXa) channel, R was significantly correlated with rivaroxaban and apixaban levels (r = 0.93 and r = 0.83, respectively; P < 0.0001 for both). R >2.5 minutes for dabigatran (DTI channel), >2.5 minutes for apixaban, and >1.8 minutes for rivaroxaban (AFXa channel) were associated with 100% sensitivity and ≥ 90% specificity to detect DOAC levels of ≥ 50 ng/mL. Conclusion We have demonstrated that TEG_6s R has significant correlation with DOAC blood concentrations and has potential for monitoring the DOAC's effect on hemostasis with reasonable sensitivity in the small sample analyzed. This novel technology is easy to use on a small volume of whole blood without requiring a specialized laboratory. Further study is warranted to correlate R with clinical outcomes.

Dabigatran has been associated with greater risk of myocardial infarction (MI) than warfarin. It is unknown whether the increased risk is unique to dabigatran, an adverse effect shared by other oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs), or the result of a protective effect of warfarin against MI. To address these questions, we systematically searched MEDLINE and performed a meta-analysis on randomized trials that compared oral DTIs with warfarin for any indication with end point of MIs after randomization. We furthermore performed a secondary meta-analysis on atrial fibrillation stroke prevention trials with alternative anticoagulants compared with warfarin with end point of MIs after randomization. A total of 11 trials (39,357 patients) that compared warfarin to DTIs (dabigatran, ximelagatran, and AZD0837) were identified. In these trials, patients treated with oral DTIs were more likely to experience an MI than their counterparts treated with warfarin (285 of 23,333 vs 133 of 16,024, odds ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.66, p = 0.005). For secondary analysis, 8 studies (69,615 patients) were identified that compared warfarin with alternative anticoagulant including factor Xa inhibitors, DTIs, aspirin, and clopidogrel. There was no significant advantage in the rate of MIs with the use of warfarin versus comparators (odds ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.34, p = 0.59). In conclusion, our data suggest that oral DTIs were associated with increased risk of MI. This increased risk appears to be a class effect of these agents, not a specific phenomenon unique to dabigatran or protective effect of warfarin. These findings support the need for enhanced postmarket surveillance of oral DTIs and other novel agents.