Given the instability of anticoagulant activity of warfarin and its potential deleterious effects on bone and vasculature, NOACs may be preferable to warfarin for diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation.
Do NOACs improve clinical efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation?
Due to concerns over variable pharmacokinetics and increased risks of bone fracture and vascular calcification, NOACs may be a safer and more effective alternative to warfarin in diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation.
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common arrhythmias in elderly people. The risk of thromboembolic stroke is increased in AF patients, especially those with diabetes. Anticoagulant therapy, such as warfarin and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs), is recommended for diabetic patients with AF. However, recent guidelines do not preferentially recommend NOACs over warfarin for diabetic patients. Variability of glycemic control in diabetic patients could affect the pharmacokinetics and anticoagulant activity of warfarin, therefore, the risk-benefit balance of warfarin is prone to be compromised in diabetic patients with AF. Furthermore, since warfarin inhibits the vitamin K-dependent gamma-glutamyl carboxylation of proteins, including osteocalcin and matrix Gla protein, use of warfarin may increase the risk of osteoporotic bone fracture and vascular calcification, both of which are the leading causes of morbidity that diminish the quality of life in diabetic patients. Even though the cost of NOACs is high, NOACs may be preferable to warfarin for the treatment of diabetic patients with AF.
Sho‐ichi Yamagishi (Mon,) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation and diabetes. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Warfarin was evaluated. Given the instability of anticoagulant activity of warfarin and its potential deleterious effects on bone and vasculature, NOACs may be preferable to warfarin for diabetic patients with atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: