Key result
Uninterrupted peri-procedural use of apixaban compared to rivaroxaban during atrial fibrillation ablation resulted in similar rates of the composite of thromboembolic and bleeding complications (7.1% vs 6.2%, p=0.7).
Why the study?
While prospective studies have shown the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban and apixaban peri-procedurally during RFA of AF, studies comparing the two agents have not been performed.
Does uninterrupted apixaban compared to rivaroxaban improve safety in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation?
Observational (n=358)
No
Does uninterrupted apixaban compared to rivaroxaban improve safety in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation?
Uninterrupted peri-procedural use of apixaban and rivaroxaban during atrial fibrillation ablation appears equally safe with low rates of bleeding and thromboembolic complications.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Similar periprocedural safety with apixaban versus rivaroxaban; leaves open need for randomized comparisons.
INTRODUCTION: Prospective studies on rivaroxaban and apixaban have shown the safety and efficacy of direct anticoagulation agents (DOAC)s used peri-procedurally during radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of atrial fibrillation (AF). Studies comparing the two agents have not been performed. METHODS: Consecutive patients from a prospective registry who underwent RFA of AF between April 2012 and March 2015 and were on apixaban or rivaroxaban were studied. Clinical variables and outcomes were noted. RESULTS: There were a total of 358 patients (n = 56 on apixaban and n = 302 on rivaroxaban). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between both groups. The last dose of rivaroxaban was administered the night before the procedure in 96% of patients. In patients on apixaban, 48% of patients whose procedure was in the afternoon took the medication on the morning of the procedure. TIA/CVA occurred in 2 patients (0.6%) in rivaroxaban group with none in apixaban group (p = 0.4). There was no difference in the rate of pericardial effusion between apixaban and rivaroxaban groups [1.7% vs 0.6% (p = 0.4)]. Five percent of patients in both groups had groin complications (p = 0.9). In apixaban group, all groin complications were small hematomas except one patient who had a pseudoaneurysm (1.6%). One pseudo-aneurysm, 1 fistula and 3 large hematomas were noted in patients on rivaroxaban (1.7%) with the rest being small hematomas. DOACs were restarted post procedure typically 4 h post hemostasis. CONCLUSIONS: Peri-procedural uninterrupted use of apixaban and rivaroxaban during AF RFA is safe and there are no major differences between both groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pillarisetti et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Atrial fibrillation (n=358). Apixaban vs. Rivaroxaban was evaluated on Composite of thromboembolic and bleeding complications (p=0.7). Uninterrupted peri-procedural use of apixaban compared to rivaroxaban during atrial fibrillation ablation resulted in similar rates of the composite of thromboembolic and bleeding complications (7.1% vs 6.2%, p=0.7).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: