Why the study?
Does the choice of NOAC (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) at standard or reduced doses affect the risk of stroke/thromboembolism and bleeding in oral anticoagulant-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation?
Population
31,522 oral anticoagulant-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation initiating NOAC treatment in Denmark
Comparison
Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban at standard… vs Direct comparisons between dabigatran…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
1 year
Key result
Standard and reduced dose NOACs showed similar stroke risks in AF patients, but standard-dose rivaroxaban had a higher major bleeding risk (2.78%) compared to dabigatran (ARD -0.93%).
Authors
Loading...
Supports caution with standard-dose rivaroxaban for bleeding risk in AF; leaves open optimal NOAC selection pending randomized data.
Cohort (n=31,522)
Yes
Does the choice of NOAC (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) at standard or reduced doses affect the risk of stroke/thromboembolism and bleeding in oral anticoagulant-naïve patients with atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Risk Reduction: -0.93 (95% CI -1.45–-0.38)
Absolute Risk Reduction: -0.93%
In a nationwide cohort of AF patients, standard and reduced doses of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban showed similar effectiveness for stroke prevention, but rivaroxaban was associated with higher major bleeding risk.
Stærk et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation (n=31,522). Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) vs. Active comparators (head-to-head NOAC comparisons) was evaluated on Major bleeding (dabigatran vs rivaroxaban standard dose) (Absolute risk difference -0.93%, 95% CI -1.45 to -0.38). Standard and reduced dose NOACs showed similar stroke risks in AF patients, but standard-dose rivaroxaban had a higher major bleeding risk (2.78%) compared to dabigatran (ARD -0.93%).