What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Atrial Fibrillation (n=2535). Intervention: Oral Anticoagulation vs. No Oral Anticoagulation. Primary outcome: NACE (Net Adverse Clinical Events) (aOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.63–2.82, p=<0.001).

What does this research mean for the field?

OAC non-use in patients with AF at high risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.CONFIRMATORY. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.SUPPORTS_CONSENSUS.

What question did this study set out to answer?

Evaluate outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk for bleeding and stroke based on oral anticoagulation use.

January 9, 2026Journal of Thrombosis and ThrombolysisOpen Access

Real-World outcomes of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of both bleeding anand Asia-Pacificd stroke: observational evidence from three international registries from middle East, Europe

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

OAC non-use in patients with AF at high-risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Q: What does this research mean for the field?

OAC non-use in patients with AF at high risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.CONFIRMATORY. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.SUPPORTS_CONSENSUS.

Q: What question did this study set out to answer?

Evaluate outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk for bleeding and stroke based on oral anticoagulation use.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

OAC non-use in patients with AF at high-risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Authors

AAAmir Askarinejad TBTommaso Bucci ETEnrico Tartaglia

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational evidence reveals higher risks in OAC non-users with atrial fibrillation, suggesting careful evaluation is needed.

Key Points

Evaluate outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk for bleeding and stroke based on oral anticoagulation use.
Analyzed data from three international registries in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
Included high-risk patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores ≥ 2 and HAS-BLED scores ≥ 3.
Divided patients into OAC users and non-users for comparison.
OAC non-users had higher rates of all-cause death (23.3%) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (19.3%).
Adjusted odds ratios showed significantly increased risks for non-users for all-cause death (aOR 2.23) and major bleeding (aOR 2.38).
Enrolment in non-European settings was linked to a lower risk of death (aOR 0.61) and MACE (aOR 0.42).

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=2,535)

Multicenter

Yes

PICO

Population

Atrial Fibrillation (n=2,535)

Intervention / Comparator

Oral Anticoagulation vs No Oral Anticoagulation

Primary Outcome

NACE (Net Adverse Clinical Events) — aOR 2.15 (1.63–2.82), p=<0.001

Main Result

Effect estimate: aOR 2.15 (95% CI 1.63–2.82)

Absolute Event Rate: 19.6% vs 33.5%

p-value: p=<0.001

Limitations

Short follow-up period may limit long-term outcome assessment.
Potential residual confounding and selection bias.
Non-accounting for discontinuation or initiation of OAC therapy during follow-up.

Cite This Study

Askarinejad et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Atrial Fibrillation (n=2,535). Oral Anticoagulation vs. No Oral Anticoagulation was evaluated on NACE (Net Adverse Clinical Events) (aOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.63–2.82, p=<0.001). OAC non-use in patients with AF at high-risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69609567f6dae357db7c148e https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-025-03228-6

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

January 9, 2026Journal of Thrombosis and ThrombolysisOpen Access

Real-World outcomes of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk of both bleeding anand Asia-Pacificd stroke: observational evidence from three international registries from middle East, Europe

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

OAC non-use in patients with AF at high-risk of both bleeding and stroke is associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes.

Authors

AAAmir Askarinejad TBTommaso Bucci ETEnrico Tartaglia

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational evidence reveals higher risks in OAC non-users with atrial fibrillation, suggesting careful evaluation is needed.

Key Points

Evaluate outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation at high risk for bleeding and stroke based on oral anticoagulation use.
Analyzed data from three international registries in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
Included high-risk patients with CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores ≥ 2 and HAS-BLED scores ≥ 3.
Divided patients into OAC users and non-users for comparison.
OAC non-users had higher rates of all-cause death (23.3%) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (19.3%).
Adjusted odds ratios showed significantly increased risks for non-users for all-cause death (aOR 2.23) and major bleeding (aOR 2.38).
Enrolment in non-European settings was linked to a lower risk of death (aOR 0.61) and MACE (aOR 0.42).

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=2,535)

Multicenter

Yes

PICO

Population

Atrial Fibrillation (n=2,535)

Intervention / Comparator

Oral Anticoagulation vs No Oral Anticoagulation

Primary Outcome

NACE (Net Adverse Clinical Events) — aOR 2.15 (1.63–2.82), p=<0.001

Main Result

Effect estimate: aOR 2.15 (95% CI 1.63–2.82)

Absolute Event Rate: 19.6% vs 33.5%

p-value: p=<0.001

Limitations

Short follow-up period may limit long-term outcome assessment.
Potential residual confounding and selection bias.
Non-accounting for discontinuation or initiation of OAC therapy during follow-up.

Cite This Study

synapsesocial.com/papers/69609567f6dae357db7c148e https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-025-03228-6

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark