Why the study?
Several studies have examined direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT), but their safety and efficacy compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) needed systematic assessment.
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve recanalization, reduce thrombosis extension, and lower bleeding rates compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis?
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) improve recanalization, reduce thrombosis extension, and lower bleeding rates compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis?
In patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis, DOACs significantly reduce the risk of thrombosis extension and major bleeding compared to VKAs, supporting their use as a safe and effective alternative.
BACKGROUND: Since several studies have examined the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in treating patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT), we conducted a meta-analyses to assess the safety and efficacy of DOACs compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in this population. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until June 2024. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the effect measures to compare DOACs with VKAs. RESULTS: A total of 9 observational studies were included. The pooled analysis revealed that a trend towards higher complete recanalization rates with DOACs (71.4%) compared to VKAs (55.3%), though not statistically significant (OR 1.95; 95%CI 0.70 to 5.44). For SVT extension, a significant effect was observed favoring DOACs (OR 0.12; 95%CI 0.03 to 0.54). No significant differences were found in other efficacy outcomes or safety outcomes, except for major bleeding, which was significantly lower with DOACs (OR 0.27; 95%CI 0.13 to 0.56). CONCLUSION: DOACs are superior to VKAs in SVT extension and major bleeding, suggesting that DOACs may be a favorable treatment option in the treatment of SVT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wan et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: