Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants showed comparable efficacy to vitamin K antagonists in the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.96) in patients with left ventricular thrombosis.
Why the study?
VKAs are recommended as first-line anticoagulants for left ventricular thrombosis, but DOACs are used as an alternative, prompting a comparison of their efficacy and safety.
Do DOACs provide similar efficacy and safety compared to VKAs in patients with left ventricular thrombosis?
Meta-Analysis (n=2,683)
Do DOACs provide similar efficacy and safety compared to VKAs in patients with left ventricular thrombosis?
Relative Risk: 0.96 (95% CI 0.8–1.16)
Absolute Event Rate: 17.07% vs 21.62%
p-value: p=0.677
DOACs offer similar efficacy and safety outcomes compared to VKAs for the treatment of left ventricular thrombosis, supporting their use as a viable alternative.
Background: Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) have been recommended as first-line anticoagulants for patients with left ventricular thrombosis (LVT). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used as an alternative to the standard of care in anticoagulation. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of VKAs and DOACs in the treatment of patients with LVT. Materials and Methods: Studies were identified by searching the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. The main outcomes included stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), thrombus resolution, and bleeding events. The pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was estimated with fixed effect or random effect models. Results: Seventeen studies were included. Pooled estimate showed that DOACs had comparable efficacy in prevention of SSE (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.80, 1.16; p = 0.677) and thrombus resolution as compared with VKAs (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.18; p = 0.193). DOACs significantly decreased the risk of stroke in patients with LVT (RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47, 1.00; p = 0.048). However, this effect was not observed in the sensitive analysis by high-quality studies (RR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.47, 1.02; p = 0.06). In terms of safety outcomes, DOACs had similar risk of bleeding events (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.80, 1.57; p = 0.386) and clinically relevant bleeding events (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.23, 1.03; p = 0.060). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that none of the variables (study design, concomitant antiplatelet medication, duration of follow-up, primary cause of LVT, sample size, types of DOACs) had an impact on the risk of SSE, thrombus resolution and bleeding events. Subgroup analysis based on the use of antiplatelet and treatment switching revealed that there were no significant differences among patients with different treatment regimens. Conclusions: Based on the present evidence, both DOACs and VKA offered similar effective and safe outcomes in patients with LVT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Left Ventricular Thrombosis (n=2,683). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated on Stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80, 1.16, p=0.677). Direct oral anticoagulants showed comparable efficacy to vitamin K antagonists in the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism (RR 0.96) in patients with left ventricular thrombosis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: