Background: Managing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) presents challenges given that there are several potential antithrombotic therapy (ATT) strategies.

Aims: We examined ATT patterns, agreement between subjective physician ratings and validated risk scores, physician-patient perceptions influencing ATT and 1-year outcomes.

Methods: The AVIATOR 2 prospective registry enrolled 514 non-valvular AF-PCI patients from 11 sites. Treating physicians selected ATT and completed smartphone surveys rating stroke and bleeding risks, compared against CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. Patients completed surveys regarding treatment understanding. Primary outcomes were 1-year major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE: composite of death, myocardial infarction, definite/probable stent thrombosis, stroke, target lesion revascularisation) and actionable bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5).

Results: The mean patient age was 73.2±9.0 years, including 25.8% females. Triple therapy (TT: 1 anticoagulant and 2 antiplatelet agents) was prescribed in 66.5%, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in 20.7% and dual therapy (1 anticoagulant+1 antiplatelet agent) in 12.8% of patients. Physician ratings and validated risk scores showed poor agreement (stroke: kappa=0.03; bleeding: kappa=0.07). Physicians rated bleeding-related safety (93.8%) as the main factor affecting ATT choice. Patients worried about stroke over bleeding (50.6% vs 14.8%). No group differences by ATT strategy were observed in 1-year MACCE (TT 14.1% vs dual therapy 12.7% vs DAPT 18.5%; p=0.25), or actionable bleeding (14.7% vs 7.9% vs 15.1%, respectively; p=0.89).

Conclusions: The AVIATOR 2 study is the first digital health study examining physician-patient perspectives on ATT choices after AF-PCI. TT was the most common strategy without differences in 1-year outcomes in ATT strategy. Physicians rated safety first when prescribing ATT; patients feared stroke over bleeding.