Key result
Uninterrupted DOACs during catheter ablation of NVAF showed no significant difference vs VKA in major bleeding (RR 0.54, P=0.05), minor bleeding (RR 1.11, P=0.50), or thromboembolism (RR 0.74).
Why the study?
Does uninterrupted DOACs reduce major bleeding and thrombo-embolic events compared to uninterrupted VKA in patients undergoing catheter ablation for non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,716)
Does uninterrupted DOACs reduce major bleeding and thrombo-embolic events compared to uninterrupted VKA in patients undergoing catheter ablation for non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
An uninterrupted DOAC strategy for catheter ablation of non-valvular atrial fibrillation is as safe and effective as uninterrupted VKA, with a trend toward reduced major bleeding.
Supports uninterrupted DOACs over VKA to reduce major bleeding in AF ablation; strengthens RCT evidence for periprocedural use.
Aims: To assess the incremental benefit of uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (VKA) for catheter ablation (CA) of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) on three primary outcomes: major bleeding, thrombo-embolic events, and minor bleeding. A secondary outcome was post-procedural silent cerebral infarction (SCI) as detected by brain magnetic resonance imaging. Methods and results: A systematic review of Medline, Cochrane, and Embase was done to find all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which uninterrupted DOACs were compared against uninterrupted VKA for CA of NVAF. A fixed-effect model was used, with the exception of the analysis regarding major bleeding events (I2 > 25), for which a random effects model was used. The benefit of uninterrupted DOACs over VKA was analysed from four RCTs that enrolled a total of 1716 patients (male: 71.2%) with NVAF. Of these, 1100 patients (64.1%) had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. No significant benefit was seen in major bleeding events [risk ratio (RR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.29-1.00; P = 0.05]. No significant differences were found in minor bleeding events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.82-1.52; P = 0.50), thrombo-embolic events (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.26-2.11; P = 0.57), or post-procedural SCI (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74-1.53; P = 0.74). Conclusion: An uninterrupted DOACs strategy for CA of NVAF appears to be as safe as uninterrupted VKA without a significantly increased risk of minor or major bleeding events. There was a trend favouring DOACs in terms of major bleeding. Given their ease of use, fewer drug interactions and a similar security and effectiveness profile, DOACs should be considered first line therapy in patients undergoing CA for NVAF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Romero et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=1,716). Uninterrupted direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Uninterrupted vitamin K antagonists (VKA) was evaluated on Major bleeding events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.29-1.00, p=0.05). Uninterrupted DOACs during catheter ablation of NVAF showed no significant difference vs VKA in major bleeding (RR 0.54, P=0.05), minor bleeding (RR 1.11, P=0.50), or thromboembolism (RR 0.74).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: