Why the study?
Do different NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) have different safety and persistence profiles in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Population
766 patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation treated in a single cardiology outpatient clinic…
Comparison
Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban vs Head-to-head comparison among dabigatran…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
Median 367 days for dabigatran, 432 days for rivaroxaban…
Authors
Loading...
Real-world AF data link rivaroxaban to more bleeding and apixaban to better persistence; leaves open randomized confirmation before changing selection.
Do different NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) have different safety and persistence profiles in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
In a real-world AF clinic setting, apixaban demonstrated lower discontinuation rates compared to dabigatran and rivaroxaban, while rivaroxaban was associated with higher bleeding rates.
Al‐Khalili et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: