Why the study?
Does the use of NOACs improve outcomes and reduce bleeding compared to conventional therapy in patients with pulmonary embolism?
Does the use of NOACs improve outcomes and reduce bleeding compared to conventional therapy in patients with pulmonary embolism?
This position paper provides expert consensus on the practical use, dosing, and follow-up of NOACs for pulmonary embolism, supporting their safety and efficacy over conventional therapy.
Endorses NOACs as preferred for pulmonary embolism; confirms randomized evidence with practical dosing and follow-up guidance.
The new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have radically changed the approach to the treatment and prevention of thromboembolic pulmonary embolism. The authors of this position paper face, in succession, issues concerning NOACs, including (i) their mechanism of action, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics; (ii) the use in the acute phase with the ‘double drug single dose’ approach or with ‘single drug double dose’; (iii) the use in the extended phase with demonstrated efficacy and with low incidence of bleeding events; (iv) the encouraging use of NOACs in particular subgroups of patients such as those with cancer, the ones under- or overweight, with renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance > 30 mL/min), the elderly (>75 years); (v) they propose a possible laboratory clinical pathway for follow-up; and (vi) carry out an examination on the main drug interactions, their potential bleeding risk, and the way to deal with some bleeding complications. The authors conclude that the use of NOACs both in the acute phase and in the extended phase is equally effective to conventional therapy and associated with fewer major bleeding events, which make their use in patients at higher risk of recurrences safer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enea et al. (2017) conducted a review in Pulmonary embolism. Non-vitamin K dependent new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Conventional therapy (LMWH and Vitamin K antagonists) was evaluated. NOACs are equally effective to conventional therapy for the acute and extended treatment of pulmonary embolism and are associated with fewer major bleeding events.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: