Key result
New target-specific oral anticoagulants offer predictable anticoagulant effects without the need for routine monitoring, though bleeding complications and the lack of universal reversal agents remain.
This review provides an overview of the evolving landscape of anticoagulation for venous thromboembolism, highlighting the shift from traditional agents to new oral anticoagulants and future investigational targets.
Anticoagulant drugs, like vitamin K antagonists and heparin, have been the mainstay for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolic disease for many years. Although effective if appropriately used, traditional anticoagulants have several limitations such as unpredictable pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic responses and various adverse effects including serious bleeding complications. New oral anticoagulants have recently emerged as an alternative because of their rapid onset/offset of action, predictable linear dose-response relationships and fewer drug interactions. However, they are still associated with problems such as bleeding, lack of reversal agents and standard laboratory monitoring. In an attempt to overcome these drawbacks, key steps of the hemostatic pathway are investigated as targets for anticoagulation. Here we reviewed the traditional and new anticoagulants with respect to their targets in the coagulation cascade, along with their therapeutic advantages and disadvantages. In addition, investigational anticoagulant drugs currently in the development stages were introduced.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2017) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolism. New oral anticoagulants vs. Traditional anticoagulants was evaluated. New target-specific oral anticoagulants offer predictable anticoagulant effects without the need for routine monitoring, though bleeding complications and the lack of universal reversal agents remain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: