Key result
DOAC use was associated with a similar risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and a bioprosthetic heart valve (HR 1.14).
Why the study?
The effectiveness and safety of DOACs in atrial fibrillation patients with a bioprosthetic heart valve was largely unknown.
Does DOAC prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolism compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and a bioprosthetic heart valve?
Cohort (n=1,086)
Does DOAC prevent ischemic stroke and systemic embolism compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and a bioprosthetic heart valve?
Hazard Ratio: 1.14 (95% CI 0.56–2.34)
Absolute Event Rate: 4.85% vs 4.66%
p-value: p=0.715
In patients with atrial fibrillation and a bioprosthetic heart valve, DOACs appear to be as effective and safe as warfarin for preventing systemic embolic events in real-world practice.
BACKGROUND: Non-vitamin K direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) is effective for prevention of embolic events in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, the effectiveness and safety of DOAC in AF patients who have bioprosthetic heart valve (BPHV) is largely unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with AF and BPHV, using the diagnostic code and medical device and surgery information from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, between 2013 and 2018. A 1:2 propensity score-matched cohort (n = 724 taking warfarin; n = 362 taking DOAC) was constructed and analyzed for the primary clinical outcome, a composite of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism. Important secondary outcomes included major bleeding, all-cause death, and the net clinical outcome, defined as a composite of all embolic events, major bleeding, and death. RESULTS: The mean age was 78.9±6.8 years old, and 45% (n = 489) were male. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.7±1.4. DOAC was non-inferior to warfarin for preventing ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-2.34), major bleeding (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.32-2.03) and all-cause death (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.73-1.63). As for the net clinical outcome, DOAC was also similar to warfarin (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.76-1.47). These outcomes were not different in various subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide Korean AF population with a BPHV, DOAC was at least as effective and safe as warfarin for the prevention of systemic embolic events. These results suggest that DOAC may be an excellent alternative to warfarin in AF patients with BPHV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moon et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Atrial fibrillation with bioprosthetic heart valve (n=1,086). Non-vitamin K direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on Composite of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.56-2.34, p=0.715). DOAC use was associated with a similar risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and a bioprosthetic heart valve (HR 1.14).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: