Key result
Rivaroxaban demonstrated comparable efficacy and a non-significant reduction in bleeding events (10% vs 25%, p=0.161) compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
Why the study?
Atrial fibrillation is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, but the tolerability and efficacy of rivaroxaban compared to warfarin for non-valvular atrial fibrillation needed evaluation.
Does rivaroxaban improve tolerability and efficacy compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Cross-Sectional (n=45)
No
Does rivaroxaban improve tolerability and efficacy compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Absolute Event Rate: 10% vs 25%
p-value: p=0.161
In this small cross-sectional study of young patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban demonstrated comparable efficacy and tolerability to warfarin with no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes or bleeding events.
May support rivaroxaban preference for convenience in non-valvular AF; leaves open efficacy confirmation via randomized trials.
Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia and is seen in 1–2% of the general population. Objectives: The main objective of the study is to find the tolerability and efficacy of rivaroxaban Vs warfarin for non valvular atrial fibrillation. Material and methods: This cross sectional comparative study was conducted in Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences Islamabad during January 2021 to June 2021. After permission from hospital ethical committee, total 70 patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria was enrolled in the study from OPDs of cardiology and allied Departments of hospital. Detailed history and physical examination was done to meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Informed consent was obtained. Results: Out of 70 patients enrolled in total, 15 were excluded because of the above-mentioned exclusion criteria; 6 patients of NOAC group denied to participate and left cohort; and 4 patients lost the follow-up. Out of 45 participants, 21 were treated with rivaroxaban, while 24 were treated with warfarin. Conclusion: It is concluded that oral anticoagulant drugs for prevention of stroke in non-valvular AF have been evolved and adding new options and advantages for patients and physicians such as fewer frequency of drug and food interactions, no need for monitoring, broad therapeutic index and tolerated better by patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rehman et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=45). Rivaroxaban vs. Warfarin was evaluated on All bleeding events (p=0.161). Rivaroxaban demonstrated comparable efficacy and a non-significant reduction in bleeding events (10% vs 25%, p=0.161) compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: