Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants are a reasonable alternative to vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation patients with CHADS2 score ≥3, advanced age, and heart failure, with rivaroxaban showing the lowest risk index for major bleeding.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs in AF patients with CHADS2 score≥3, advanced age, and heart failure from pivotal randomized clinical trials.
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation?
Systematic Review
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation?
DOACs are a reasonable alternative to vitamin-K antagonists in high-risk AF patients, with varying risk indices for bleeding and stroke among different DOACs.
Background. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in a subgroup of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), CHADS2 score≥3, advanced age, and heart failure (HF) coming from the main DOACs randomized clinical trials. Methods. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations. EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. English-language articles published from 2002 to March 2019 dealing with DOACs for preventing thrombotic events in AF were considered. We did not conduct any statistical analyses as indirect comparison between DOACs represents hypothesis generators. Results. This systematic review was restricted to the subgroup of patients with CHADS2 score≥3 (n=31,203), elderly (n=24,788), and with HF (n=29,297) derived from the pivotal trials. Risk index (RI) was calculated. The RI for stroke/systemic embolism was similar in all of the patients treated with DOACs or warfarin. The lowest RI was in rivaroxaban patients (CHADS2 score≥3: RI=0.04; elderly: RI=0.09; HF: RI=0.05). The RIs for bleeding were higher in patients treated with dabigatran (CHADS2 score≥3: RI110=0.23; elderly: RI110=0.22; HF: RI110=0.16. CHADS2 score≥3: RI150=0.30; elderly: RI150=0.24; HF: RI150=0.16). The bleeding RIs were higher with apixaban (CHADS2 score≥3: RI=0.23; elderly: RI=0.25; HF: RI=0.14) and dabigatran (CHADS2score≥3: RI=0.28; elderly: RI=0.21; HF: RI=0.19). Conclusions. The use of DOACs is a reasonable alternative to vitamin-K antagonists in AF patients with CHADS2 score≥3, advanced age, and HF. The RI constitutes a useful, additional tool to facilitate clinicians in choosing DOACs or Warfarin in particular category of AF patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Acanfora et al. (2019) conducted a systematic review in Atrial Fibrillation with High Thromboembolic Risk. Direct oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Risk index (RI) for stroke/systemic embolism. Direct oral anticoagulants are a reasonable alternative to vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation patients with CHADS2 score ≥3, advanced age, and heart failure, with rivaroxaban showing the lowest risk index for major bleeding.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: