Key result
In AF patients with polypharmacy, NOACs reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with VKAs (moderate polypharmacy HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.86; severe HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.82).
Why the study?
The study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of NOACs vs VKAs in AF patients with polypharmacy.
Do NOACs reduce stroke or systemic embolism compared to VKAs in atrial fibrillation patients with polypharmacy?
Meta-Analysis
Do NOACs reduce stroke or systemic embolism compared to VKAs in atrial fibrillation patients with polypharmacy?
In atrial fibrillation patients with polypharmacy, NOACs are associated with a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared to VKAs, without increasing the risk of major bleeding.
Supports NOAC preference over VKAs for stroke prevention in polypharmacy AF; extends evidence across moderate and severe polypharmacy.
Aims: The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with polypharmacy. Methods and results: Randomized controlled trials or observational studies reporting the data about the NOACs and VKAs therapy among AF patients with polypharmacy were included. The search was performed in the PubMed and Embase databases up to November 2022. There were no differences in the rates of SSE but increased risk of all-cause death and major bleeding between moderate polypharmacy and severe polypharmacy versus no-polypharmacy patients. The use of NOACs compared with VKAs was significantly associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) in AF patients with moderate polypharmacy (hazard ratios [HRs], 0.77 [95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.69–0.86]) and severe polypharmacy (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69–0.82]) and there was no significant difference in major bleeding (moderate polypharmacy: HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.74–1.01]; severe polypharmacy: HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.79–1.06]) between the two groups. There were no differences in the rates of ischemic stroke, all-cause death, and gastrointestinal bleeding but reduced risk of any bleeding between the NOACs and VKAs users. Compared with VKAs, the risk of intracranial hemorrhage was reduced in patients with moderate polypharmacy but not in patients with severe polypharmacy in NOACs users. Conclusion: In patients with AF and polypharmacy, NOACs showed advantages over VKAs in SSE and bleeding, and non-inferiority in major bleeding, ischemic stroke, all-cause death, intracranial hemorrhage, and gastrointestinal bleeding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in atrial fibrillation with polypharmacy. non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated on stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) in AF patients with moderate polypharmacy (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.86). In AF patients with polypharmacy, NOACs reduced the risk of stroke or systemic embolism compared with VKAs (moderate polypharmacy HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.86; severe HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.82).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: