Key result
Rivaroxaban linked to ~205% higher major bleeding and thrombosis risk vs dabigatran in AF with anemia/thrombocytopenia.
Why the study?
Data are limited regarding the clinical benefits and harms of direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation complicated by anemia or thrombocytopenia.
Does rivaroxaban compared to dabigatran improve clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation complicated with anemia and/or thrombocytopenia?
Cohort (n=5,469)
Yes
Does rivaroxaban compared to dabigatran improve clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation complicated with anemia and/or thrombocytopenia?
Effect estimate: aOR 3.05 (95% CI 1.46-6.39)
p-value: p=0.003
In patients with atrial fibrillation complicated by anemia or thrombocytopenia, dabigatran is associated with a lower risk of major bleeding and composite thrombotic/bleeding events compared to rivaroxaban.
May support preferring dabigatran over rivaroxaban in AF with anemia/thrombocytopenia; leaves optimal choice open pending RCTs.
Background There are limited data about the clinical benefits and harm of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) complicated with anemia or thrombocytopenia. Methods This is a multi-center retrospective cohort study involving 5469 AF patients from 15 hospitals in China. Patients were divided into three groups according to hemoglobin and platelet levels: Group 1 (hemoglobin male ≥ 130 g/L; female ≥ 120 g/L and platelet ≥ 100 × 10 9 /L), Group 2 (hemoglobin male < 130 g/L; female < 120 g/L or platelet < 100 × 10 9 /L), and Group 3 (hemoglobin male < 130 g/L; female < 120 g/L and platelet < 100 × 10 9 /L). Patients in each category are further divided into two groups according to their stroke prevention strategies: rivaroxaban or dabigatran. Clinical results include major, minor, total bleeding, thrombosis, and the composite outcome of major bleeding and thrombosis. Results Higher hemoglobin levels were associated with a reduced risk of total bleeding and major bleeding, while platelet counts were not associated with any event. Compared with Group 1, Group 2 had a higher risk of major bleeding (aOR 1.70, 95%CI 1.12–2.57, P = 0.012), and the composite endpoint of major bleeding and thrombosis (aOR 1.70, 95%CI 1.19–2.44, P = 0.004). Compared with Group 1, Group 3 had a higher total bleeding risk (aOR 2.15, 95%CI 1.14–4.05, P = 0.018). Compared with dabigatran, rivaroxaban was associated with higher composite risk in Group 1 (aOR 2.91, 95% CI 1.66–5.16, P < 0.001) and Group 2 (aOR 3.05, 95%CI 1.46–6.39, P = 0.003), but there was no significant difference in Group 3 (aOR 1.78, 95%CI 0.23—13.54, P = 0.577). Conclusions Higher hemoglobin levels are associated with a reduced risk of total bleeding and major bleeding in patients with AF. Dabigatran was associated with better clinical outcomes than rivaroxaban in patients with anemia or thrombocytopenia but not in those with anemia and thrombocytopenia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation complicated with anemia and/or thrombocytopenia (n=5,469). Rivaroxaban vs. Dabigatran was evaluated on Composite of major bleeding and thrombosis in patients with anemia or thrombocytopenia (Group 2) (aOR 3.05, 95% CI 1.46-6.39, p=0.003). Rivaroxaban was associated with a higher composite risk of major bleeding and thrombosis compared to dabigatran in atrial fibrillation patients with anemia or thrombocytopenia (aOR 3.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: