-
Scientific Reports Jun 2024This review used traditional and network meta-analyses (NMA) to conduct a comprehensive study of antithrombotic therapies in children with thromboembolic disease. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This review used traditional and network meta-analyses (NMA) to conduct a comprehensive study of antithrombotic therapies in children with thromboembolic disease. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from their inception to 26 February, 2023. And we finally included 16 randomized controlled trials. In the prevention of thromboembolic events (TEs), the use of anticoagulants had a low risk of TEs (relative risk (RR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.94) and a high risk of minor bleeding (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.86) compared with no anticoagulants. In the treatment of TEs, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were not inferior to standard anticoagulation in terms of efficacy and safety outcomes. In NMA, rivaroxaban and apixaban showed the lowest risk for TEs and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. According to the overall assessment of efficacy and safety, dabigatran may be the best choice for children with thromboembolic disease. The results of our study will provide references and suggestions for clinical drug selection.
Topics: Humans; Child; Thromboembolism; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Anticoagulants; Treatment Outcome; Pyrazoles; Dabigatran; Rivaroxaban; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pyridones
PubMed: 38862574
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-64334-8 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2023Antithrombin (AT) deficiency increases the risk for venous thromboembolism, therefore, a highly sensitive assay to identify this condition is crucial. The aim of this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antithrombin (AT) deficiency increases the risk for venous thromboembolism, therefore, a highly sensitive assay to identify this condition is crucial. The aim of this paper was to perform a meta-analysis comparing AT activities measured by different AT activity assays in patients with heparin binding site AT deficiency. In addition, the diagnostic sensitivity of selected assays was compared depending on the available data. An extensive literature search was performed considering results with publication date up to July 10, 2021. Seven relevant English-language observational studies, comparing AT activity measured by different AT activity assays in Caucasian Europeans with either the AT Budapest III or AT Padua I mutation were included in meta-analyses. There was no significant difference in AT activity between Labexpert and Innovance in patients with AT Budapest III (P = 0.567) and AT Padua I (P = 0.265), while AT activity determined by HemosIL was significantly higher compared to Innovance for both mutations (AT Budapest III: P < 0.001; AT Padua I: P < 0.001). These results are in line with the results of comparison of diagnostic sensitivity. In patients with AT Budapest III, the AT activity was also higher when measured with Berichrom compared to Innovance (P = 0.002), however, the results of comparison of diagnostic sensitivity across studies were variable. No significant difference (P = 0.117) in AT activity as well as diagnostic sensitivity was observed between Sta-Stachrom and Innovance. The results of our study suggest that Innovance, Labexpert and Sta-Stachrom are the most sensitive activity assays for detection of AT Budapest III and AT Padua I, whereas HemosIL showed considerably lower sensitivity for these two variants. As revealed in our study, the diagnostic sensitivity of AT activity assays to type II heparin binding site AT deficiency is different, and in some assays mutation dependent.
Topics: Humans; Heparin; Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation Tests; Antithrombin III Deficiency; Binding Sites; Antithrombins
PubMed: 37794095
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-43941-x -
Cardiology Journal 2024Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of concomitant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, routine femoral artery access, and less potent effects of clopidogrel limits meaningful comparisons. The present study is a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin to heparin in contemporary practice.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for relevant studies, including comparisons between bivalirudin and heparin in the current medical era from inception to December 23, 2021. Studies reporting incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and net adverse clinical events (NACE) in patients undergoing PCI and meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 8 studies. Compared to heparin, bivalirudin during PCI was associated with a lower NACE risk, lower all-cause death, and similar MACE risk, with a pooled risk ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.97, p = 0.02), 0.83 (95% CI 0.74-0.94, p = 0.002), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.78-1.10, p = 0.38), respectively. Moreover, the reduction in NACE was mainly attributed to reduced bleeding (22% reduction in the risk of major bleeding, 95% CI 0.63-0.97, p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS
These findings suggest that bivalirudin use during PCI reduced the risk of NACE and all-cause death but did not reduce the risk of MACE compared with heparin use in PCI. More studies specifically designed for anticoagulation strategies and a personalized anticoagulation regimen to comprehensively balance bleeding and ischemia risks are required.
Topics: Humans; Hirudins; Heparin; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Peptide Fragments; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Recombinant Proteins; Anticoagulants; Antithrombins; Hemorrhage; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37964648
DOI: 10.5603/cj.90956 -
Clinical Cardiology May 2024The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is associated with complex hemostatic changes. Systemic anticoagulation is initiated to prevent clotting in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is associated with complex hemostatic changes. Systemic anticoagulation is initiated to prevent clotting in the ECMO system, but this comes with an increased risk of bleeding. Evidence on the use of anti-Xa-guided monitoring to prevent bleeding during ECMO support is limited. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the association between anti-factor Xa-guided anticoagulation and hemorrhage during ECMO.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed (up to August 2023).
PROSPERO
CRD42023448888.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies comprising 2293 patients were included in the analysis, with six works being part of the meta-analysis. The mean anti-Xa values did not show a significant difference between patients with and without hemorrhage (standardized mean difference -0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.19; 0.28, p = .69). We found a positive correlation between anti-Xa levels and unfractionated heparin dose (UFH; pooled estimate of correlation coefficients 0.44; 95% CI: 0.33; 0.55, p < .001). The most frequent complications were any type of hemorrhage (pooled 36%) and thrombosis (33%). Nearly half of the critically ill patients did not survive to hospital discharge (47%).
CONCLUSIONS
The most appropriate tool for anticoagulation monitoring in ECMO patients is uncertain. Our analysis did not reveal a significant difference in anti-Xa levels in patients with and without hemorrhagic events. However, we found a moderate correlation between anti-Xa and the UFH dose, supporting its utilization in monitoring UFH anticoagulation. Given the limitations of time-guided monitoring methods, the role of anti-Xa is promising and further research is warranted.
Topics: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Humans; Hemorrhage; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation; Factor Xa; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38693831
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24273 -
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Feb 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an irregular heart rhythm which is becoming more and more common in this new era. Obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular events, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparing the Clinical Outcomes Observed with Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin for the Management of Obese Patients with Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an irregular heart rhythm which is becoming more and more common in this new era. Obesity is a risk factor for cardiovascular events, and obese patients are more at risk for stroke. The Framingham Heart Study demonstrated an increase in the developmental risk of AF by 4% for every unit (kg/m) increase in body mass index (BMI). An anticoagulant is often required for the management of such patients. In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the clinical outcomes which were associated with rivaroxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of obese patients with non-valvular AF.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, http://www.
CLINICALTRIALS
gov , Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central were the searched databases. Clinical outcomes including stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding were the endpoints. In this study, dichotomous data were analyzed by the RevMan software version 5.4. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for result interpretation.
RESULTS
Ten studies consisting of a total number of 168,081 obese participants were included whereby 81,332 participants were treated with rivaroxaban and 86,749 participants were treated with warfarin. The risks of ischemic (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.84; P = 0.00001) and hemorrhagic stroke (RR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; P = 0.0001) as well as systemic embolism (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.87; P = 0.0004) were significantly lower with rivaroxaban compared to warfarin for the management of these obese patients with non-valvular AF. Rivaroxaban was also associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87; P = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Based on this analysis, rivaroxaban seemed to be a better option in comparison to warfarin, due to its association with significantly lower risks of stroke and bleeding outcomes in obese patients with non-valvular AF. However, this hypothesis should further be confirmed in larger clinical trials.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Rivaroxaban; Atrial Fibrillation; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Obesity; Embolism; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35763193
DOI: 10.1007/s10557-022-07361-9 -
PloS One 2024The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Can the combination of antiplatelet or alteplase thrombolytic therapy with argatroban benefit patients suffering from acute stroke? a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.
BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is presently uncertain. However, it is important to highlight the potential benefits of combining this medication with known thrombolytics or antiplatelet therapy. One notable advantage of argatroban is its short half-life, which helps minimize excessive anticoagulation and risk of bleeding complications in inadvertent cases of hemorrhagic stroke. By conducting a meticulous review and meta-analysis, we aim to further explore the common use of argatroban and examine the plausible advantages of combining this medication with established thrombolytic and antiplatelet therapies.
METHOD
In this study, we performed a rigorous and methodical search for both randomized controlled trials and retrospective analyses. Our main objective was to analyze the impact of argatroban on the occurrence of hemorrhagic events and the mRS scores of 0-2. We utilized a meta-analysis to assess the relative risk (RR) associated with using argatroban versus not using it.
RESULTS
In this study, we analyzed data from 11 different studies, encompassing a total of 8,635 patients. Out of these patients, 3999(46.3%) received argatroban treatment while the remaining 4636(53.7%)did not. The primary outcome of 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale (mRS) score≤2) showed that the risk ratio (RR) for patients using argatroban after alteplase thrombolytic therapy compared to those not using argatroban was(RR, 1.00 ([95% CI, 0.92-1.09]; P = 0.97), indicating no statistical significance. However, for patients using argatroban after antiplatelet therapy, was (RR,1.09 [95% CI, 1.04-1.14]; P = 0.0001), which was statistically significant. In terms of hemorrhagic events, the RR for patients using argatroban compared to those not using argatroban was (RR,1.08 [95% CI, 0.88-1.33]; P = 0.46), indicating no statistical significance.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study suggest that further research into combination therapy with argatroban and antiplatelet agents may be warranted, however more rigorous RCTs are needed to definitively evaluate the effects of combination treatment.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Tissue Plasminogen Activator; Retrospective Studies; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Fibrinolytic Agents; Thrombolytic Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arginine; Pipecolic Acids; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38412157
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298226