Key result
Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are superior to traditional anticoagulants in several aspects but retain the ability to cause haemorrhage and may require laboratory monitoring.
NOACs, while superior to traditional anticoagulants in several aspects, still carry a risk of hemorrhage and may require laboratory monitoring.
NOACs warrant bleeding vigilance in practice; leaves open optimal monitoring protocols across indications.
Disadvantages with traditional anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists and heparinoids) have led to the development on non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). These agents are set to replace the traditional anticoagulants in situations such as following orthopaedic surgery, in atrial fibrillation, and in the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. Although superior to vitamin K antagonists and heparinoids in several aspects, NOACs retain the ability to cause haemorrhage and, despite claims to the contrary, may need monitoring. This review aims to summarise key aspects of the NOACs of relevance to the laboratory.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrew D. Blann (2014) conducted a review in Atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, and post-orthopaedic surgery. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Traditional anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists and heparinoids) was evaluated. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are superior to traditional anticoagulants in several aspects but retain the ability to cause haemorrhage and may require laboratory monitoring.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: