Why the study?
Do novel oral anticoagulants improve efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Do novel oral anticoagulants improve efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation?
Novel oral anticoagulants offer comparable or superior efficacy and safety to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, with the choice depending on patient-specific factors.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports NOAC preference over warfarin in AF; leaves open optimal agent selection by patient factors.
Atrial fibrillation is the most common rhythm disorder and represents a major public health problem because it carries an increased risk of arterial thromboembolism and ischemic stroke. Current european society of cardiology guidelines recommend to stratify atrial fibrillation patients according to the CHA2DS2-VASc score and to administer anticoagulation, preferably with novel oral anticoagulants, that is, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban, if the CHA2DS2-VASc score is at least 1. All novel anticoagulants have shown the same, if not greater, efficacy and safety as warfarin, with some advantages. The choice among the novel oral anticoagulants depends on their different pharmacokinetic profile, patients' stroke and bleeding risk, comorbidities, drug tolerability and costs and, finally, patients' preferences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prisco et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: