Key result
Rivaroxaban matches warfarin for ischemic stroke but cuts hemorrhagic stroke ~61% in non-valvular AF.
Why the study?
Warfarin reduces ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment, whereas rivaroxaban may offer more consistent and predictable anticoagulation.
Does rivaroxaban reduce stroke, systemic embolism, and bleeding compared to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
RCT (n=2,846)
Open-label
Alternate patient allocation
No
Does rivaroxaban reduce stroke, systemic embolism, and bleeding compared to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation?
In Bangladeshi patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban demonstrated similar efficacy to warfarin but significantly reduced the risk of hemorrhagic stroke over 6 months.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Rivaroxaban was associated with lower hemorrhagic stroke risk than warfarin in this cohort; leaves open net benefit on ischemic events in nonvalvular AF.
Background: The use of Warfarin reduces the rate of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may provide more consistent and predictable anticoagulant effects than Warfarin. Methods: In this Open comparison trial, the researchers compared Rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 20 mg or 15 mg daily in patient with a creatinine clearance of 30-49 ml/min ) with dose adjusted Warfarin (target INR 2.0 to3.0) in 2,846 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and CHA2DS2-VASc Score 2 or more. The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism and primary safety outcome was major or minor bleeding. This research was designed to determine whether Rivaroxaban have more efficacy and safety than Warfarin for the primary outcomes. Results: Total follow-up period was 6 months. Risk factors and co-morbidities were similar in both groups. Baseline investigations were also similar. Age and sex of both groups were matched. The rate of ischaemic stroke was 1.8% in Rivaroxaban group, as compared with 2.18% in the Warfarin group (p 0.479, nonsignificant). The rate of haemorrhagic stroke was 0.53% in Rivaroxaban group, as compared with 1.36 % in the Warfarin group (p 0.026, significant). Systemic embolism was 0.08% in Rivaroxaban group, as compared with 0.15 % in the Warfarin group (p 0.561, non-significant). The rate of major bleeding was 0.4% in Rivaroxaban group and 0.53 % in the Warfarin group (p 0.361, non-significant). The rate of minor bleeding was 2.10% in Rivaroxaban group, as compared with 2.33% in the Warfarin group (p 0.681, non-significant). Conclusions: Rivaroxaban have similar efficacy and better safety profile than Warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in Bangladeshi population. University Heart Journal Vol. 16, No. 2, Jul 2020; 99-105
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sodruddin et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (n=2,846). Rivaroxaban vs. Dose adjusted Warfarin (target INR 2.0 to 3.0) was evaluated on Ischemic stroke (component of primary composite endpoint) (p=0.479). Rivaroxaban showed similar efficacy to Warfarin for ischemic stroke but significantly reduced hemorrhagic stroke (0.53% vs 1.36%) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: