Key result
Direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists showed no significant differences in the frequency of left ventricular thrombus resolution, stroke, thromboembolism, bleeding, or all-cause death.
Why the study?
Previous meta-analyses comparing VKAs and DOACs for left ventricular thrombus did not include single-arm studies.
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) provide similar efficacy and safety compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of left ventricular thrombus?
Meta-Analysis (n=2,612)
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) provide similar efficacy and safety compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of left ventricular thrombus?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.75% vs 0.75%
p-value: p=0.8799
DOACs appear to have similar efficacy and safety profiles compared to VKAs for the treatment of left ventricular thrombus, supporting their potential use as an alternative therapy.
BACKGROUND: Although several meta-analyses have compared efficacies of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for treatment of left ventricular thrombus (LVT), those meta-analyses included no single-arm studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles investigating thrombus resolution, stroke, any thromboembolism, major bleeding, any bleeding, or all-cause death in LVT treated with VKAs or DOACs, and single-class meta-analyses were also included (PROSPERO database, CRD42021230849). Event rates were pooled using a random effects model. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore factors that may influence outcomes. 2,612 patients from 23 articles were included (VKAs: 2,004, DOACs: 608). There were no significant differences between VKAs and DOACs in the frequency of thrombus resolution (VKAs: 0.75 [95% confidence interval; 0.67 to 0.81], DOACs: 0.75 [0.67 to 0.82]), stroke (VKAs: 0.06 [0.04 to 0.10], DOACs: 0.02 [0.01 to 0.01]), any thromboembolism (VKAs: 0.08 [0.05 to 0.13], DOACs: 0.03 [0.01 to 0.10]), major bleeding (VKAs: 0.06 [0.04 to 0.09], DOACs: 0.03 [0.01 to 0.06]), any bleeding (VKAs: 0.08 [0.05 to 0.12], DOACs: 0.08 [0.06 to 0.10]), and all-cause death (VKAs: 0.07 [0.04 to 0.13], DOACs: 0.09 [0.05 to 0.16]). Meta-regression analysis revealed that increased duration of follow-up was associated with lower-rates of stroke (estimate: -0.040, p = 0.0495) with VKAs, but not with DOACs. There was significant publication bias for thrombus resolution, stroke, any thromboembolism, any bleeding, and all-cause death. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy and adverse outcomes of therapy with DOACs and VKAs do not differ. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal anticoagulant strategy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kitano et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in Left ventricular thrombus (n=2,612). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was evaluated on Thrombus resolution (p=0.8799). Direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists showed no significant differences in the frequency of left ventricular thrombus resolution, stroke, thromboembolism, bleeding, or all-cause death.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: