Key result
Vitamin K antagonists with a target INR of 2.0-3.0 are more effective than aspirin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients with thromboembolic risk factors.
Why the study?
Does VKA therapy prevent thromboembolic complications better than aspirin in patients with mechanical heart valves or atrial fibrillation?
Does VKA therapy prevent thromboembolic complications better than aspirin in patients with mechanical heart valves or atrial fibrillation?
This review highlights that VKA therapy (target INR 2.0-3.0) is superior to aspirin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients with thromboembolic risk factors.
Reinforces guideline-directed VKA preference in high-risk AF; leaves open optimal regimens for mechanical valves.
There is a wide array of recommendations for the management of anticoagulant therapy in patients with mechanical heart valves. Especially the optimal intensity of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is a ongoing matter of debate. On the basis of several studies, recommendations for daily clinical practice can be made. In this review, we discussed the studies and the different guidelines. Guidelines for the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with atrial fibrillation are more stringent. VKA with a target INR between 2.0 and 3.0 is more effective in the prevention of stroke than aspirin, especially in the presence of riskfactors for thromboembolism (age above 65, previous thromboembolism, history of hypertension and diabetes, enlarged left atrial diameter and left ventricular dysfunction). In the absence of clinical or echocardiographical riskfactors for thromboembolism, patients may be safely treated with aspirin.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vink et al. (2004) conducted a review in Prosthetic heart valves or atrial fibrillation. Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) vs. Aspirin was evaluated on Prevention of stroke. Vitamin K antagonists with a target INR of 2.0-3.0 are more effective than aspirin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients with thromboembolic risk factors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: