-
NPJ Microgravity Feb 2024The validity of venous ultrasound (V-US) for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) during spaceflight is unknown and difficult to establish in diagnostic accuracy...
The validity of venous ultrasound (V-US) for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) during spaceflight is unknown and difficult to establish in diagnostic accuracy and diagnostic management studies in this context. We performed a systematic review of the use of V-US in the upper-body venous system in spaceflight to identify microgravity-related changes and the effect of venous interventions to reverse them, and to assess appropriateness of spaceflight V-US with terrestrial standards. An appropriateness tool was developed following expert panel discussions and review of terrestrial diagnostic studies, including criteria relevant to crew experience, in-flight equipment, assessment sites, ultrasound modalities, and DVT diagnosis. Microgravity-related findings reported as an increase in internal jugular vein (IJV) cross-sectional area and pressure were associated with reduced, stagnant, and retrograde flow. Changes were on average responsive to venous interventions using lower body negative pressure, Bracelets, Valsalva and Mueller manoeuvres, and contralateral IJV compression. In comparison with terrestrial standards, spaceflight V-US did not meet all appropriateness criteria. In DVT studies (n = 3), a single thrombosis was reported and only ultrasound modality criterion met the standards. In the other studies (n = 15), all the criteria were appropriate except crew experience criterion, which was appropriate in only four studies. Future practice and research should account for microgravity-related changes, evaluate individual effect of venous interventions, and adopt Earth-based V-US standards.
PubMed: 38316814
DOI: 10.1038/s41526-024-00356-w -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... Oct 2023Patients undergoing total hip (THA) or knee (TKA) arthroplasty are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). As the number performed annually increases, the... (Review)
Review
The use of pre-operative Inferior Vena Cava filters for thromboprophylaxis in ultra-high-risk patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and narrative analysis.
PURPOSE
Patients undergoing total hip (THA) or knee (TKA) arthroplasty are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). As the number performed annually increases, the population at risk of fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) also grows. Ultra-high-risk arthroplasty patients (UHRAPs) include those with additional comorbidities, or a history of VTE, for many of whom routine prophylaxis will previously have failed. Pre-operative insertion of Inferior Vena Cava filters (IVCFs) has been recommended for thromboprophylaxis in UHRAPs, and this review was performed to establish their results.
METHODS
A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed for studies reporting the use of Inferior Vena Cava filters in hip and knee arthroplasty patients.
RESULTS
Ten studies met the inclusion criteria, containing 718 IVCFs in Orthopaedic patients, 343 of which were permanent (47.8%), 369 potentially retrievable (51.4%), 5 absorbable (0.6%) and one of unknown design (0.1%). Patient age averaged 64.7yrs (17-95) and 56% were female. Pre-operatively, 415 prophylactic IVCFs were inserted in 409 UHRAPs, undergoing a total of 438 total joint arthroplasties (TJA). There were 11 cases of PE in the entire series (1.5%) only one of which was fatal (0.01%), with four non-fatal PE in the UHRAP group (0.96%). Removal was attempted for 283 of the retrievable filters (76.7%) and was successful in 280 (98.9%).
CONCLUSION
The use of IVCFs eliminated fatal PE in UHRAPs, but larger, high-quality studies, with standardised reporting, are still required to determine their absolute indications for use, complication profile, efficacy and optimum design.
Topics: Humans; Female; Child; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Male; Vena Cava Filters; Venous Thromboembolism; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Anticoagulants; Pulmonary Embolism; Risk Factors; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37000238
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03531-z -
Health Technology Assessment... Mar 2024Pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is currently recommended for women assessed as being at high risk of venous thromboembolism during...
BACKGROUND
Pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent venous thromboembolism is currently recommended for women assessed as being at high risk of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or in the 6 weeks after delivery (the puerperium). The decision to provide thromboprophylaxis involves weighing the benefits, harms and costs, which vary according to the individual's venous thromboembolism risk. It is unclear whether the United Kingdom's current risk stratification approach could be improved by further research.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify the current decision uncertainty associated with selecting women who are pregnant or in the puerperium for thromboprophylaxis and to estimate the value of one or more potential future studies that would reduce that uncertainty, while being feasible and acceptable to patients and clinicians.
METHODS
A decision-analytic model was developed which was informed by a systematic review of risk assessment models to predict venous thromboembolism in women who are pregnant or in the puerperium. Expected value of perfect information analysis was used to determine which factors are associated with high decision uncertainty and should be the target of future research. To find out whether future studies would be acceptable and feasible, we held workshops with women who have experienced a blood clot or have been offered blood-thinning drugs and surveyed healthcare professionals. Expected value of sample information analysis was used to estimate the value of potential future research studies.
RESULTS
The systematic review included 17 studies, comprising 19 unique externally validated risk assessment models and 1 internally validated model. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity were highly variable ranging from 0% to 100% and 5% to 100%, respectively. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias and applicability concerns. The decision analysis found that there is substantial decision uncertainty regarding the use of risk assessment models to select high-risk women for antepartum prophylaxis and obese postpartum women for postpartum prophylaxis. The main source of decision uncertainty was uncertainty around the effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis for preventing venous thromboembolism in women who are pregnant or in the puerperium. We found that a randomised controlled trial of thromboprophylaxis in obese postpartum women is likely to have substantial value and is more likely to be acceptable and feasible than a trial recruiting women who have had a previous venous thromboembolism. In unselected postpartum women and women following caesarean section, the poor performance of risk assessment models meant that offering prophylaxis based on these models had less favourable cost effectiveness with lower decision uncertainty.
LIMITATIONS
The performance of the risk assessment model for obese postpartum women has not been externally validated.
CONCLUSIONS
Future research should focus on estimating the efficacy of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in pregnancy and the puerperium, and clinical trials would be more acceptable in women who have not had a previous venous thromboembolism.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020221094.
FUNDING
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR131021) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Topics: Humans; Pregnancy; Female; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Cesarean Section; Postpartum Period; Obesity; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38476084
DOI: 10.3310/DFWT3873 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2024Thromboembolic (TE) complications [myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE)] are common causes of mortality in...
Thromboembolic (TE) complications [myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE)] are common causes of mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Therefore, this review was undertaken to explore the incidence of TE complications and mortality associated with TE complications in hospitalised COVID-19 patients from different studies. A literature search was performed using ScienceDirect and PubMed databases using the MeSH term search strategy of "COVID-19", "thromboembolic complication", "venous thromboembolism", "arterial thromboembolism", "deep vein thrombosis", "pulmonary embolism", "myocardial infarction", "stroke", and "mortality". There were 33 studies included in this review. Studies have revealed that COVID-19 patients tend to develop venous thromboembolism (PE:1.0-40.0% and DVT:0.4-84%) compared to arterial thromboembolism (stroke:0.5-15.2% and MI:0.8-8.7%). Lastly, the all-cause mortality of COVID-19 patients ranged from 4.8 to 63%, whereas the incidence of mortality associated with TE complications was between 5% and 48%. A wide range of incidences of TE complications and mortality associated with TE complications can be seen among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Therefore, every patient should be assessed for the risk of thromboembolic complications and provided with an appropriate thromboprophylaxis management plan tailored to their individual needs.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Thromboembolism; Hospitalization; Pulmonary Embolism; SARS-CoV-2; Incidence; Venous Thromboembolism; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 38730292
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09374-1 -
Medicine Jun 2024The study aimed to predict the risk factors of deep vein thrombosis of lower extremity after traumatic fracture of lower extremity, so as to apply effective strategies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The study aimed to predict the risk factors of deep vein thrombosis of lower extremity after traumatic fracture of lower extremity, so as to apply effective strategies to prevent deep vein thrombosis of lower extremity, improve survival rate, and reduce medical cost.
METHODS
The English and Chinese literatures published from January 2005 to November 2023 were extracted from PubMed, Embase, Willey Library, Scopus, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata/SE 16.0 software.
RESULTS
A total of 13 articles were included in this paper, including 2699 venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients and 130,507 normal controls. According to the meta-results, 5 independent risk factors can be identified: history of VTE was the most significant risk factor for deep vein thrombosis after traumatic lower extremity fracture (risk ratio [RR] = 6.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.64-11.26); age (≥60) was the risk factor for deep vein thrombosis after traumatic lower extremity fracture (RR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.02-2.18); long-term braking was a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis after traumatic lower extremity fracture (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.11-1.93); heart failure was a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis after traumatic lower extremity fracture (RR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.51-2.33); obesity was a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis after traumatic lower extremity fracture (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.35-1.83).
CONCLUSION
The study confirmed that the history of deep vein thrombosis, age (60 + years), previous history of VTE, obesity, prolonged bed rest, and heart failure are all associated with an increased risk of VTE. By identifying these significant risk factors, we can more intensively treat patients at relatively high risk of VTE, thereby reducing the incidence of VTE. However, the limitation of the study is that the sample may not be diversified enough, and it fails to cover all potential risk factors, which may affect the universal applicability of the results. Future research should include a wider population and consider more variables in order to obtain a more comprehensive risk assessment.
Topics: Humans; Age Factors; Fractures, Bone; Heart Failure; Lower Extremity; Risk Factors; Venous Thrombosis; Middle Aged
PubMed: 38847716
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038439 -
World Neurosurgery Jun 2024Venous sinus thromboses (VSTs) are rare complications of neurosurgical procedures in the proximity of the dural sinuses. Surgery of the posterior cranial fossa (PCF) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Venous sinus thromboses (VSTs) are rare complications of neurosurgical procedures in the proximity of the dural sinuses. Surgery of the posterior cranial fossa (PCF) and particularly of the cerebellopontine angle (CPA) shows increased risk of VST. VST management is challenging because anticoagulant therapy must be balanced with the risk of postoperative bleeding. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the most important neuroradiologic and clinical aspects of VST after PCF/CPA surgery.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify articles reporting data on VST after PCF/CPA surgery. We selected only comparative studies providing adequate neuroimaging assessing VST and a control group.
RESULTS
We included 13 articles reporting 1855 patients. VST occurred in 251/1855 cases (estimated incidence, 17.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.4%-22.2%). Only presigmoid approach (odds ratio [OR], 2.505; 95% CI, 1.161-5.404; P = 0.019) and intraoperative sinus injury (OR, 8.95; 95% CI, 3.43-23.34; P < 0.001) showed a significant association with VST. VST-related symptoms were reported in 12/251 patients with VST (pooled incidence, 3.1%; 95% CI, 1%-5.2%). In particular, we found a significantly increased OR of cerebrospinal fluid leak (OR, 3.197; 95% CI, 1.899-5.382; P < 0.001) and cerebrospinal fluid dynamic alterations in general (OR, 3.625; 95% CI, 2.370-5.543; P < 0.001). Indications for VST treatment were heterogeneous: 58/251 patients underwent antithrombotics, with 6 treatment-related bleedings. Recanalization overall occurred in 56.4% (95% CI, 40.6%-72.2%), with no significant difference between treated and untreated patients. However, untreated patients had a favorable outcome.
CONCLUSIONS
VST is a relatively frequent complication after PCF/CPA surgery and a presigmoid approach and intraoperative sinus injury represent the most significant risk factors. However, the clinical course is generally benign, with no advantage of antithrombotic therapy.
Topics: Humans; Sinus Thrombosis, Intracranial; Cranial Fossa, Posterior; Risk Factors; Neurosurgical Procedures; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38531470
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.03.087 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023The implanted vascular access ports (PORTs) were compared with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) as the administration of chemotherapy regarding different...
BACKGROUND
The implanted vascular access ports (PORTs) were compared with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) as the administration of chemotherapy regarding different clinical effects and adverse effects. Which is better is debatable. Hence, the current study was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of these two optimal vascular access strategies.
METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library updated in May 2023. Studies on the differences in complication rates in patients with cancer using either PICC or PORT for chemotherapy were included. Meta-analysis Revman 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 22 articles were retrieved. The results suggested that PORT has a superior safety profile, with lower incidences of overall adverse effects (OR=2.72, 95% CI=1.56-4.72 P=0.0004), catheter-related thrombosis (OR=2.84, 95% CI=1.97-4.11, P<0.00001), and allergic reactions (OR=6.26, 95% CI=1.86-21.09, P=0.003) than typically expected with PICC. Moreover, PICC was non-inferior to the PORT group with respect to DVT (OR=2.00, 95% CI=0.86-4.65, P=0.11) and infection (OR=1.55, 95% CI=0.75-3.22, P=0.24).
CONCLUSION
PORT achieved safety benefits compared with chemotherapy through PICC. Therefore, PORT is regarded as safe and effective vascular access for the administration of chemotherapy. When considering economic factors and some key elements, more high-quality research would help verify these clinical benefits.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identififier CRD42023421690.
PubMed: 37519803
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1228092 -
Thrombosis Research Jun 2024COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racialized populations, with particular impact among individuals of Black individuals. However, it is unclear whether... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
IMPORTANCE
COVID-19 has disproportionately affected racialized populations, with particular impact among individuals of Black individuals. However, it is unclear whether disparities in venous thromboembolic (VTE) complications exist between Black individuals and those belonging to other racial groups with confirmed SARS-CoV2 infections.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the prevalence and moderators associated with VTE among Black COVID-19 patients in minoritized settings, and to compare this to White and Asian COVID-19 patients according to sex, age, and comorbid health conditions (heart failure, cancer, obesity, hypertension).
DESIGN SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and CENTRAL for articles or reports published from inception to February 15, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Reports on VTE among Black individuals infected with SARS-CoV2, in countries where Black people are considered a minority population group.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Study characteristics and results of eligible studies were independently extracted by 2 pairs of reviewers. VTE prevalence was extracted, and risk of bias was assessed. Prevalence estimates of VTE prevalence among Black individuals with COVID19 in each study were pooled. Where studies provided race-stratified VTE prevalence among COVID19 patients, odds ratios were generated using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Prevalence of VTE, comprising of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.
RESULTS
Ten studies with 66,185 Black individuals reporting the prevalence of COVID-19 associated VTE were included. Weighted median age of included studies was 47.60. Pooled prevalence of COVID-19 associated VTE was 7.2 % (95 % CI, 3.8 % - 11.5 %) among Black individuals. Among individuals with SARS-CoV2 infections, Black population had higher risks of VTE compared to their White (OR = 1.79, [95 % CI 1.28-2.53], p < .001) or Asian (OR = 2.01, [95 % CI, 1.14-3.60], p = .017) counterparts, or patients with other racial identities (OR = 2.01, [95 % CI, 1.39, 2.92]; p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Black individuals with COVID-19 had substantially higher risk of VTE compared to White or Asian individuals. Given racial disparities in thrombotic disease burden related to COVID-19, medical education, research, and health policy interventions are direly needed to ensure adequate disease awareness among Black individuals, to facilitate appropriate diagnosis and treatment among Black patients with suspected and confirmed VTE, and to advocate for culturally safe VTE prevention strategies, including pre-existing inequalities to the COVID-19 pandemic that persist after the crisis.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Venous Thromboembolism; White People; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Asian People; Female; Male; Risk Factors; Minority Groups; Black People
PubMed: 38733691
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2024.05.007 -
Heliyon Feb 2024To evaluate the risk factors for increased risk of venous thrombosis after arthroscopic knee surgery.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the risk factors for increased risk of venous thrombosis after arthroscopic knee surgery.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to April 4, 2023. Observational studies investigated venous thrombosis following arthroscopic knee surgery were included. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the methodological quality of included studies. The odd ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) pertaining to each risk factor were synthesized through a random effects model by STATA 14 software.
RESULTS
The protocol this meta-analysis has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023410283). A total of 22 observational studies were included in the systematic review, all of which were of moderate or high methodological quality. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that several factors were significantly associated with an elevated risk of venous thrombosis following arthroscopic knee surgery. These factors included age (mean age ≥30 years) [OR = 1.08, 95%CI (1.04, 1.13), P = 0.001], overweight or obesity [OR = 1.31, 95%CI (1.13, 1.52), P<0.001], oral contraceptive use [OR = 1.90, 95%CI (1.52, 2.37), P<0.001], and smoking history [OR = 1.35, 95%CI (1.06, 1.71), P = 0.014]. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis indicated that patients with an average age over 50 years [OR = 3.18, 95%CI (1.17, 8.66), P = 0.001] and those who underwent surgery with a tourniquet for ≥90 min [OR = 4.79, 95%CI (1.55, 14.81), P = 0.007] were at a significantly increased risk of venous thrombosis after knee arthroscopy.
CONCLUSION
Age, obesity, oral contraceptives, smoking history, and prolonged tourniquet use may increase the risk of venous thrombosis after arthroscopic knee surgery. The incidence of venous thrombosis after knee arthroscopy is on a downward trend, but due to its severity, increasing awareness of risk factors and implementing effective prophylaxis are important tasks for clinicians to prevent the risk of venous thrombosis after knee arthroscopy.
PubMed: 38379989
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25939 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to prevent ischaemic cardiovascular events is promising, but the evidence remains limited.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in addition to background antiplatelet therapy, compared with placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in people without an indication for anticoagulation (i.e. atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and two clinical trial registers in September 2022 with no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of included studies for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs plus antiplatelet therapy versus placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, in people without an indication for anticoagulation after an AMI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects pairwise analyses using Review Manager Web, and network meta-analysis using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0-to-1 scale.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified seven eligible RCTs, including an ongoing trial that we could not include in the analysis. Of the six RCTs involving 33,039 participants, three RCTs compared rivaroxaban with placebo, two RCTs compared apixaban with placebo, and one RCT compared dabigatran with placebo. All participants in the six RCTs received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. The available evidence suggests that rivaroxaban compared with placebo reduces the rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.98; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty) and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01; NNTB 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; moderate certainty). There is probably little or no difference between apixaban and placebo in all-cause mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.35; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 334; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.27; number needed to treat not applicable; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty). Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; NNTB 63; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Dabigatran compared with placebo may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, although the point estimate suggests benefit (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.52; NNTB 143; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Two of the investigated NOACs were associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared to placebo: apixaban (RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.06; NNTH 143; 2 studies, 8544 participants; high certainty) and rivaroxaban (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.12 to 9.77; NNTH 125; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty). There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.22 to 14.12; NNTH 500; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). The results of the network meta-analysis were inconclusive between the different NOACs at all individual doses for all primary outcomes. However, low-certainty evidence suggests that apixaban (combined dose) may be less effective than rivaroxaban and dabigatran for preventing all-cause mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduces all-cause mortality and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality and may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality. There is probably no meaningful difference in the rate of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between apixaban and placebo. Moreover, we found no meaningful benefit in efficacy outcomes for specific therapy doses of any investigated NOACs following AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Evidence from the included studies suggests that rivaroxaban and apixaban increase the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo. There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding. Network meta-analysis did not show any superiority of one NOAC over another for our prespecified primary outcomes. Although the evidence suggests that NOACs reduce mortality, the effect size or impact is small; moreover, NOACs may increase major bleeding. Head-to-head trials, comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more solid evidence.
Topics: Humans; Dabigatran; Rivaroxaban; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage
PubMed: 38264795
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014678.pub2