Key result
NOACs were associated with similar risks for TIA, stroke, or death (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.85-1.05) and severe bleeds (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.88-1.19) compared with warfarin.
Why the study?
Do NOACs reduce the risk of stroke, death, and severe bleeding compared to warfarin in OAC-naïve patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Population
22,198 OAC-naïve patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation initiating treatment from 2012 to 2015 in…
Comparison
Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants vs Warfarin
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
Supports real-world NOAC use in AF; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Cohort (n=22,198)
Do NOACs reduce the risk of stroke, death, and severe bleeding compared to warfarin in OAC-naïve patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Hazard Ratio: 0.94 (95% CI 0.85–1.05)
In routine clinical practice, NOACs demonstrate similar overall effectiveness and safety to warfarin in OAC-naïve AF patients, with a lower risk of intracranial bleeding but a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding.
Forslund et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (n=22,198). Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. Warfarin was evaluated on TIA/ischaemic or unspecified stroke/death (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85-1.05). NOACs were associated with similar risks for TIA, stroke, or death (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.85-1.05) and severe bleeds (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.88-1.19) compared with warfarin.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: