Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants were associated with similar rates of left ventricular thrombus resolution compared to vitamin K antagonists (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.47-1.75; P=.78).
Why the study?
Guidelines recommend vitamin K antagonists for left ventricular thrombus resolution, but direct oral anticoagulants are increasingly evaluated as alternatives.
Do DOACs improve left ventricular thrombus resolution and reduce systemic embolism or stroke compared to VKAs in patients with left ventricular thrombus?
Meta-Analysis (n=828)
Do DOACs improve left ventricular thrombus resolution and reduce systemic embolism or stroke compared to VKAs in patients with left ventricular thrombus?
Odds Ratio: 0.91 (95% CI 0.47–1.75)
p-value: p=.78
DOACs appear as effective as VKAs for left ventricular thrombus resolution with a similar risk of systemic embolism/stroke and potentially lower overall bleeding risk, though randomized trials are needed to confirm these observational findings.
Comparable thrombus resolution with DOACs versus VKAs in observational data; leaves open whether RCTs will confirm equivalence for LV thrombus.
Background: Current guidelines recommend vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for left ventricular thrombus (LVT) resolution. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly evaluated as alternatives to the standard of care in anticoagulation. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the use of DOACs vs VKAs for LVT treatment. The occurrence of LVT resolution, systemic embolism (SE) or stroke, and bleeding events were compared during follow-up using random-effects analysis. Results: The 5 included studies were all observational (a total of 828 patients). Of these, 284 patients (34%) were treated with DOACs, and 544 (66%) treated with VKAs. Thrombus resolution was similar for both methods (pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.47-1.75; I 2 = 63%; P = .78). The incidence of SE or stroke was also similar (pooled OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.85-2.97; I 2 = 0%; P = .14). Clinically relevant bleeding incidence was similar for both groups (pooled OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.31-1.40; I 2 = 0%; P = .28), although all bleeding events were less frequent in the DOAC group (pooled OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.26-0.90; I 2 = 0%; P = .02). Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggests DOACs were as effective as VKAs for LVT resolution, with a similar risk of systemic embolism/stroke and clinically relevant bleeding. These results, obtained from observational studies, are not definitive and hence randomized controlled trials are needed. Nevertheless, our analysis identifies key experimental features required in future studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saleiro et al. (2020) conducted a meta-analysis in Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) (n=828). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated on Thrombus resolution (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.47-1.75, p=.78). Direct oral anticoagulants were associated with similar rates of left ventricular thrombus resolution compared to vitamin K antagonists (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.47-1.75; P=.78).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: