Why the study?
There is limited evidence comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in solid organ transplant recipients.
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce bleeding or venous thromboembolism compared to warfarin in solid organ transplant recipients?
Do direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce bleeding or venous thromboembolism compared to warfarin in solid organ transplant recipients?
DOACs appear to be a safe alternative to warfarin in solid organ transplant recipients, demonstrating a lower risk of composite bleeding and comparable rates of major bleeding and venous thromboembolism.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support preferring DOACs over warfarin to reduce composite bleeding in transplant recipients; extends observational data but leaves open RCT confirmation.
There is limited evidence comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We performed a pooled analysis to study the safety and efficacy of DOACs in this patient population. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases using the search terms "heart transplant" or "lung transplant" or "liver transplant" or "kidney transplant" or "pancreas transplant" and "direct oral anticoagulant" for literature search. Random effects model with Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool the outcomes. Pooled analysis included 489 patients, of which 259 patients received DOACs and 230 patients received warfarin. When compared to warfarin, the use of DOACs was associated with decreased risk of composite bleed (RR .49, 95% CI .32-.76, p = .002). There were no differences in rates of major bleeding (RR .55, 95% CI .20-1.49, p = .24) or venous thromboembolism (RR .65, 95% CI .25-1.70, p = .38) between the two groups. Evidence from pooled analysis suggests that DOACs are comparable to warfarin in terms of safety in SOT recipients. Further research is warranted to conclusively determine whether DOACs are safe alternatives to warfarin for anticoagulation in SOT recipients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zakko et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: