Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Edoxaban Dose Adjustment and Age-Associated Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Primary result · Clinical outcomes by eDAC, age and treatmentResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 1.73 95% CI 1.01–2.95Authors' conclusion
Patients aged ≥80 years without eDAC were at a higher risk of major bleeding and MGIB events with edoxaban 60 mg vs VKA.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with AF after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)
- Participants
- 1,377 patients
- Comparison
- Patients with vs without edoxaban dose adjustment criteria (eDAC), by age and treatment
- eDACn = 637
- No eDACn = 740reference
Methodological detailson-treatment analysis
- On-treatment analysis
Primary result
Clinical outcomes by eDAC, age and treatment
Hazard ratio
1.73
95% CI 1.01–2.95
P = 0.045
eDACvs No eDAC
HR 1.73 (95% CI 1.01–2.95); P = 0.045
As reported in the abstract
Safety
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Major bleeding, age ≥80 years without eDAC (annualized)Edoxabanvs VKA | 1.86 (1.04–3.32) | |
| Major GI bleeding, age ≥80 years without eDAC (annualized)Edoxabanvs VKA | 3.79 (1.56–9.25) | |
| 0.10.31310Hazard ratio (log scale) |
| Outcome | eDAC | No eDAC |
|---|---|---|
| Major GI bleeding in edoxaban-treated patients | 4.65%/year | 8.03%/year |
| Major GI bleeding, age <80 years | 2.98%/year | 4.22%/year |
Original publication
Edoxaban Dose Adjustment and Age-Associated Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. JACC Adv. Published 19 November 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →