Apixaban and edoxaban had the lowest risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding among NOACs, whereas rivaroxaban increased bleeding risk compared to conventional therapy (OR 1.37; 95% CrI 1.00-1.85).
Meta-Analysis (n=139,392)
Patients receiving oral anticoagulation (n=139,392)
Novel oral anticoagulants (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) vs Conventional regimens
Major gastrointestinal (MGI) bleeding — OR 1.37 (1.00-1.85)
Effect estimate: OR 1.37 (95% CI 1.00-1.85)
Background: There is no consensus at present regarding the differences in the risk of GI bleeding across various NOAC regimens. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding after different NOAC regimens. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Clinicaltrial.gov and Clinicaltrialresults.org were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing gastrointestinal bleeding of all NOAC regimens from inception to January 2018. The primary endpoint was major gastrointestinal (MGI) bleeding. The meta-regression was performed to access the association between the MGI bleeding events and mortality. The network meta-analysis was carried out with the Bayesian random-effect model. Results: A total of 25 RCTs, including 139,392 patients, were identified. Meta-regression analysis showed that MGI bleeding was correlated with fatal bleeding events (odds ratios OR, 1.76; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.13–2.77], P=0.015). The network meta-analysis results showed that compared to the conventional regimens, rivaroxaban was associated with increased risk of MGI bleeding (OR, 1.37; 95% credible interval CrI, 1.00–1.85), but not the apixaban (OR, 0.77; 95% CrI, 0.53–1.07]), edoxaban (OR, 0.86; 95%CrI, 0.52–1.18) and dabigatran etexilate (OR, 1.22; 95% CrI, 0.82–1.69). Compared to rivaroxaban, apixaban (OR, 0.56; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.88) and edoxaban (OR, 0.62; 95% CrI, 0.35–0.96) showed a significantly lower risk of MGI bleeding. Apixaban had the highest probability of being the safest option with regard to the risk of MGI bleeding (89.1%), followed by edoxaban (77.4%), conventional therapy (51.4%), dabigatran etexilate (23.8%) and rivaroxaban (8.3%). Conclusion: The risk of GI bleeding significantly varies among different NOAC regimens, and evidence shows that apixaban and edoxaban had the most favorable MGI bleeding safety profile, while rivaroxaban and dabigatran etexilate were the least safe. Keywords: new oral anticoagulant, gastrointestinal bleeding, network meta-analysis
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Wenqin Guo
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College
Xiehui Chen
Longgang Central Hospital
Xiaoyuan Tian
Shandong University
Clinical Epidemiology
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College
Guangxi Medical University
Fu Wai Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Guo et al. (Mon,) conducted a meta-analysis in Patients receiving oral anticoagulation (n=139,392). Novel oral anticoagulants (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban, dabigatran) vs. Conventional regimens was evaluated on Major gastrointestinal (MGI) bleeding (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.00-1.85). Apixaban and edoxaban had the lowest risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding among NOACs, whereas rivaroxaban increased bleeding risk compared to conventional therapy (OR 1.37; 95% CrI 1.00-1.85).
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a12beb792637892a9a72cf5 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/clep.s219335