Cargando…
Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background: Recent observational studies have compared effectiveness and safety profiles between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the confounders may exist due to the nature of clinical practice-based data, thu...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8554192/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34722686 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.757188 |
_version_ | 1784591742037655552 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Fuwei Yang, Yunyao Cheng, Winglam Ma, Jianyong Zhu, Wengen |
author_facet | Liu, Fuwei Yang, Yunyao Cheng, Winglam Ma, Jianyong Zhu, Wengen |
author_sort | Liu, Fuwei |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Recent observational studies have compared effectiveness and safety profiles between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the confounders may exist due to the nature of clinical practice-based data, thus potentially influencing the reliability of results. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the effect of NOACs with warfarin based on the propensity score-based observational studies vs. randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: Articles included were systematically searched from the PubMed and EMBASE databases until March 2021 to obtain relevant studies. The primary outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were extracted and then pooled by the random-effects model. Results: A total of 20 propensity score-based observational studies and 4 RCTs were included. Compared with warfarin, dabigatran (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71–0.96]), rivaroxaban (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.75–0.85]), apixaban (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65–0.86]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.60–0.83]) were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, whereas dabigatran (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.87]), apixaban (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56–0.67]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.45–0.74]) but not rivaroxaban (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84–1.00]) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding based on the observational studies. Furthermore, the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg was significantly lower in observational studies than that in the RE-LY trial, whereas the pooled results of observational studies were similar to the data from the corresponding RCTs in other comparisons. Conclusion: Data from propensity score-based observational studies and NOAC trials consistently suggest that the use of four individual NOACs is non-inferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8554192 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85541922021-10-30 Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Liu, Fuwei Yang, Yunyao Cheng, Winglam Ma, Jianyong Zhu, Wengen Front Cardiovasc Med Cardiovascular Medicine Background: Recent observational studies have compared effectiveness and safety profiles between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the confounders may exist due to the nature of clinical practice-based data, thus potentially influencing the reliability of results. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the effect of NOACs with warfarin based on the propensity score-based observational studies vs. randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: Articles included were systematically searched from the PubMed and EMBASE databases until March 2021 to obtain relevant studies. The primary outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were extracted and then pooled by the random-effects model. Results: A total of 20 propensity score-based observational studies and 4 RCTs were included. Compared with warfarin, dabigatran (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71–0.96]), rivaroxaban (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.75–0.85]), apixaban (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65–0.86]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.60–0.83]) were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, whereas dabigatran (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.87]), apixaban (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56–0.67]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.45–0.74]) but not rivaroxaban (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84–1.00]) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding based on the observational studies. Furthermore, the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg was significantly lower in observational studies than that in the RE-LY trial, whereas the pooled results of observational studies were similar to the data from the corresponding RCTs in other comparisons. Conclusion: Data from propensity score-based observational studies and NOAC trials consistently suggest that the use of four individual NOACs is non-inferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF patients. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8554192/ /pubmed/34722686 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.757188 Text en Copyright © 2021 Liu, Yang, Cheng, Ma and Zhu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Cardiovascular Medicine Liu, Fuwei Yang, Yunyao Cheng, Winglam Ma, Jianyong Zhu, Wengen Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Reappraisal of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | reappraisal of non-vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Cardiovascular Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8554192/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34722686 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.757188 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liufuwei reappraisalofnonvitaminkantagonistoralanticoagulantsinatrialfibrillationpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yangyunyao reappraisalofnonvitaminkantagonistoralanticoagulantsinatrialfibrillationpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT chengwinglam reappraisalofnonvitaminkantagonistoralanticoagulantsinatrialfibrillationpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT majianyong reappraisalofnonvitaminkantagonistoralanticoagulantsinatrialfibrillationpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhuwengen reappraisalofnonvitaminkantagonistoralanticoagulantsinatrialfibrillationpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |