Anticoagulation in XXXX : a contemporary viewpoint.

@entity1 @entity101 @entity548 @entity2067 @entity1031 @entity955 @entity1229
Anticoagulation therapy in @entity1 with @entity955 is important. This review consists of three parts: chronic anticoagulation, anticoagulation for cardioversion, and a brief comment on anticoagulation around the time of left atrial radiofrequency ablation. The risk stratification scheme of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/European Society of Cardiology (ACC/AHA/ESC) guidelines for chronic anticoagulation is briefly reviewed. Although there are several other similar schemes, they are not identical. The key point is the balance between benefit and risk. Some emerging controversies are outlined. Two specific questions explored are: is well-controlled @entity101 a risk factor, and does paroxysmal @entity955 confer the same risk as continuous @entity955 ? Differences in the risk of @entity548 while taking a @entity2067 antagonist noted in recent compared with older data are discussed. Risk of @entity548 in the elderly and combined antithrombotic therapy with a @entity2067 antagonist and an antiplatelet agent in high-risk @entity1 are briefly discussed. Recent failures of studies attempting to find a suitable alternative to @entity2067 antagonists are outlined. The treatment guidelines for anticoagulation for cardioversion are briefly reviewed. The risk of @entity1031 according to international normalized ratio and use of low-molecular-weight heparin as an alternative to @entity1229 are discussed. Anticoagulation before and after left atrial radiofrequency ablation is empirical, and long-term anticoagulation seems advisable for high risk @entity1 at the present time. The two most pressing needs for further investigation are (1) clarification, simplification, and consolidated of risk stratification schemes and treatment recommendations and (2) discovery of alternatives to @entity1229 .
