-
Neurocritical Care Jun 2022Our objective was to compare the effectiveness of intravenous and enteral nimodipine in preventing poor outcome from delayed cerebral ischemia in patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Our objective was to compare the effectiveness of intravenous and enteral nimodipine in preventing poor outcome from delayed cerebral ischemia in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. We performed a systematic search and a network meta-analysis using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar. Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess risk of bias of included studies. A ranking among methods was performed on the basis of the frequentist analog of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Published studies that met the following population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) criteria were included: patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage aged 15 years or older (P); nimodipine, intravenous and oral formulation (I); placebo or no intervention (C); poor outcome measured at 3 months (defined as death, vegetative state, or severe disability), case fatality at 3 months, delayed cerebral ischemia, delayed ischaemic neurologic deficit, and vasospasm measured with transcranial Doppler or digital subtraction angiography (O); and randomized controlled trials (S). No language or publication date restrictions were applied. Ten studies were finally included, with a total of 1527 randomly assigned patients. Oral and intravenous nimodipine were both effective in preventing poor outcome, delayed cerebral ischemia, and delayed ischaemic neurological deficit. Neither treatment was effective in improving case fatality. Evolving clinical protocols over a 30-year period and the risk of bias of the included studies may limit the strength of our results. Enteral and intravenous nimodipine may have a similar effectiveness in terms of preventing poor outcome, delayed cerebral ischemia, and delayed ischaemic neurological deficit. More research may be needed to fully establish the role of intravenous nimodipine in current clinical practice.
Topics: Brain Ischemia; Cerebral Infarction; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Nimodipine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Subarachnoid Hemorrhage; Treatment Outcome; Vasospasm, Intracranial
PubMed: 35419702
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-022-01493-4 -
Future Cardiology May 2022To compare real-world effectiveness/safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists among patients with non-valvular atrial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To compare real-world effectiveness/safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. A systematic review of electronic databases yielded 7661 citations published from January 2013 to January 2020. Fifty-five studies were included in Bayesian network meta-analyses of hazard ratios. In comparison with vitamin K antagonists, apixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage and all-cause mortality. Apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban, but not rivaroxaban, were associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding. This study confirmed the effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation in real-world settings, consistent with clinical trial evidence.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Bayes Theorem; Dabigatran; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Pyridones; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Vitamin K
PubMed: 35360925
DOI: 10.2217/fca-2021-0120 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jul 2017The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Valvular Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
The original non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) trials in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled patients with native valve pathologies. The object of this study was to quantify the benefit-risk profiles of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with native valvular heart disease (VHD).
METHODS AND RESULTS
Trials were identified by exhaustive literature search. Trial data were combined using inverse variance weighting to produce a meta-analytic summary hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of efficacy and safety of NOACs versus warfarin. Our final analysis included 4 randomized controlled trials that enrolled 71 526 participants, including 13 574 with VHD. Pooling results from included trials showed that NOACs versus warfarin reduced stroke or systemic embolism (HR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60-0.82) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24-0.92) in AF patients with VHD. However, risk reduction of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage was driven by apixaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran (HR for major bleeding: 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.91]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 0.33 [95% CI, 0.25-0.45]) but not rivaroxaban (HR for major bleeding: 1.56 [95% CI, 1.20-2.04]; HR for intracranial hemorrhage: 1.27 [95% CI, 0.77-2.10]).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with AF and native VHD, NOACs reduce stroke and systemic embolism compared with warfarin. Evidence shows that apixaban, dabigatran, and edoxaban also reduce bleeding in this patient subgroup, whereas major bleeding (but not intracranial hemorrhage or mortality rate) is significantly increased in VHD patients treated with rivaroxaban. NOACs are a reasonable alternative to warfarin in AF patients with VHD.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Coagulation; Chi-Square Distribution; Female; Heart Valve Diseases; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Risk Factors; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin
PubMed: 28720644
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.117.005835 -
Chest May 2023The management of patients who are receiving chronic oral anticoagulation therapy and require an elective surgery or an invasive procedure is a common clinical scenario. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The management of patients who are receiving chronic oral anticoagulation therapy and require an elective surgery or an invasive procedure is a common clinical scenario.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What is the best available evidence to support the development of American College of Chest Physicians guidelines on the perioperative management of patients who are receiving long-term vitamin K agonist (VKA) or direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and require elective surgery or procedures?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
A literature search including multiple databases from database inception through July 16, 2020, was performed. Meta-analyses were conducted when appropriate.
RESULTS
In patients receiving VKA (warfarin) undergoing elective noncardiac surgery, shorter (< 3 days) VKA interruption is associated with an increased risk of major bleeding. In patients who required VKA interruption, heparin bridging (mostly with low-molecular-weight heparin [LMWH]) was associated with a statistically significant increased risk of major bleed, representing a very low certainty of evidence (COE). Compared with DOAC interruption 1 to 4 days before surgery, continuing DOACs may be associated with higher risk of bleeding demonstrated in some, but not all studies. In patients who needed DOAC interruption, bridging with LMWH may be associated with a statistically significant increased risk of bleeding, representing a low COE.
INTERPRETATION
The certainty in the evidence supporting the perioperative management of anticoagulants remains limited. No high-quality evidence exists to support the practice of heparin bridging during the interruption of VKA or DOAC therapy for an elective surgery or procedure, or for the practice of interrupting VKA therapy for minor procedures, including cardiac device implantation, or continuation of a DOAC vs short-term interruption of a DOAC in the perioperative period.
Topics: Humans; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Anticoagulants; Heparin; Warfarin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Vitamin K; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 36462533
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.11.032 -
Stroke Oct 2022High level evidence for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
High level evidence for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis.
METHODS
This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021228800). We searched MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Web of Science Core Collection between January 1, 2007 and Feb 22, 2022. Search terms included a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary terms for cerebral venous thrombosis, vitamin K antagonists/warfarin, and DOACs. We included both randomized and nonrandomized studies that compared vitamin K antagonists and DOACs in 5 or more patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed meta-analyses for efficacy (recurrent venous thromboembolism and complete recanalization) and safety (major hemorrhage) outcomes, using relative risks (RRs).
RESULTS
Out of 10 665 records identified, we screened 254 as potentially eligible. Nineteen studies (16 observational studies [n=1735] and 3 randomized controlled trials [n=215]) met the inclusion criteria. All 3 randomized controlled trials had some concerns, and all 16 observational studies had at least moderate risk of bias. When compared with vitamin K antagonist treatment, DOAC had comparable risks of recurrent venous thromboembolism (relative risk [RR], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.52-1.37], I=0%), major hemorrhage (RR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.40-1.21], I=0%), intracranial hemorrhage (RR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.30-1.12]; I=0%), death (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.54-2.43], I=1%), and complete venous recanalization (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.87-1.11]; I=0%).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis, DOACs, and warfarin may have comparable efficacy and safety. Given the limitations of the studies included (low number of randomized controlled trials, modest total sample size, rare outcome events), our findings should be interpreted with caution pending confirmation by ongoing randomized controlled trials and large, prospective, observational studies.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Thrombosis; Prospective Studies; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Vitamin K; Warfarin
PubMed: 35938419
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.122.039579 -
JAMA Mar 2018Despite increasing emphasis on conservative management of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants, different pharmacotherapeutic interventions are used to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Association of Placebo, Indomethacin, Ibuprofen, and Acetaminophen With Closure of Hemodynamically Significant Patent Ductus Arteriosus in Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
IMPORTANCE
Despite increasing emphasis on conservative management of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in preterm infants, different pharmacotherapeutic interventions are used to treat those developing a hemodynamically significant PDA.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the relative likelihood of hemodynamically significant PDA closure with common pharmacotherapeutic interventions and to compare adverse event rates.
DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION
The databases of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until August 15, 2015, and updated on December 31, 2017, along with conference proceedings up to December 2017. Randomized clinical trials that enrolled preterm infants with a gestational age younger than 37 weeks treated with intravenous or oral indomethacin, ibuprofen, or acetaminophen vs each other, placebo, or no treatment for a clinically or echocardiographically diagnosed hemodynamically significant PDA.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were independently extracted in pairs by 6 reviewers and synthesized with Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcome: hemodynamically significant PDA closure; secondary: included surgical closure, mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, and intraventricular hemorrhage.
RESULTS
In 68 randomized clinical trials of 4802 infants, 14 different variations of indomethacin, ibuprofen, or acetaminophen were used as treatment modalities. The overall PDA closure rate was 67.4% (2867 of 4256 infants). A high dose of oral ibuprofen was associated with a significantly higher odds of PDA closure vs a standard dose of intravenous ibuprofen (odds ratio [OR], 3.59; 95% credible interval [CrI], 1.64-8.17; absolute risk difference, 199 [95% CrI, 95-258] more per 1000 infants) and a standard dose of intravenous indomethacin (OR, 2.35 [95% CrI, 1.08-5.31]; absolute risk difference, 124 [95% CrI, 14-188] more per 1000 infants). Based on the ranking statistics, a high dose of oral ibuprofen ranked as the best pharmacotherapeutic option for PDA closure (mean surface under the cumulative ranking [SUCRA] curve, 0.89 [SD, 0.12]) and to prevent surgical PDA ligation (mean SUCRA, 0.98 [SD, 0.08]). There was no significant difference in the odds of mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, or intraventricular hemorrhage with use of placebo or no treatment compared with any of the other treatment modalities.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
A high dose of oral ibuprofen was associated with a higher likelihood of hemodynamically significant PDA closure vs standard doses of intravenous ibuprofen or intravenous indomethacin; placebo or no treatment did not significantly change the likelihood of mortality, necrotizing enterocolitis, or intraventricular hemorrhage.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42015015797.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Bayes Theorem; Cerebral Hemorrhage; Ductus Arteriosus, Patent; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Hemodynamics; Humans; Ibuprofen; Indomethacin; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 29584842
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.1896 -
The American Journal of Medicine Oct 2022The role of antisecretory drugs for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants is unclear. We investigated this question in a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The role of antisecretory drugs for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants is unclear. We investigated this question in a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov thru April 2021 for controlled randomized trials and observational studies evaluating the association of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or H2-receptor antagonists with overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients using anticoagulants. Independent duplicate review, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed. Observational studies were included only if they provided results controlled for at least 2 variables. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models.
RESULTS
Six observational studies and 1 randomized trial were included. All but 1 study had low risk of bias. None of the studies excluded patients with concomitant aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. For PPIs, the pooled relative risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding was 0.67 (95% confidence interval 0.61, 0.74) with low statistical heterogeneity (I = 15%). Individual studies showed greater treatment effect in patients with higher risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (eg, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or aspirin use, elevated bleeding risk score). A single observational study evaluating the association of H2-receptor antagonists with upper gastrointestinal bleeding found a relative risk of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.24-2.02).
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence drawn mostly from observational studies with low risk of bias demonstrate that PPIs reduce upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients prescribed oral anticoagulants. The benefit appears to be most clearcut and substantial in patients with elevated risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Gastrointestinal Agents; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Histamine H2 Antagonists; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Proton Pump Inhibitors
PubMed: 35679879
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2022.05.031 -
Journal of the American College of... Jan 2023The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome remain controversial. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome remain controversial.
OBJECTIVES
The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared DOACs with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs).
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through April 9, 2022. The 2 main efficacy outcomes were a composite of arterial thrombotic events and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Random effects models with inverse variance were used.
RESULTS
Our search retrieved 253 studies. Four open-label randomized controlled trials involving 472 patients were included (mean control-arm time-in-therapeutic-range 60%). All had proper random sequence generation and adequate allocation concealment. Overall, the use of DOACs compared with VKAs was associated with increased odds of subsequent arterial thrombotic events (OR: 5.43; 95% CI: 1.87-15.75; P < 0.001, I = 0%), especially stroke, and the composite of arterial thrombotic events or VTE (OR: 4.46; 95% CI: 1.12-17.84; P = 0.03, I = 0%). The odds of subsequent VTE (OR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.31-4.55; P = 0.79, I = 0%), or major bleeding (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.42-2.47; P = 0.97; I = 0%) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Most findings were consistent within subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome randomized to DOACs compared with VKAs appear to have increased risk for arterial thrombosis. No significant differences were observed between patients randomized to DOACs vs VKAs in the risk of subsequent VTE or major bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Antiphospholipid Syndrome; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thrombosis; Venous Thromboembolism; Vitamin K
PubMed: 36328154
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.10.008 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2018Post-extraction bleeding (PEB) is a recognised, frequently encountered complication in dental practice, which is defined as bleeding that continues beyond 8 to 12 hours... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Post-extraction bleeding (PEB) is a recognised, frequently encountered complication in dental practice, which is defined as bleeding that continues beyond 8 to 12 hours after dental extraction. The incidence of post-extraction bleeding varies from 0% to 26%. If post-extraction bleeding is not managed, complications can range from soft tissue haematomas to severe blood loss. Local causes of bleeding include soft tissue and bone bleeding. Systemic causes include platelet problems, coagulation disorders or excessive fibrinolysis, and inherited or acquired problems (medication induced). There is a wide array of techniques suggested for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding, which include interventions aimed at both local and systemic causes. This is an update of a review published in June 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for treating different types of post-extraction bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 24 January 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 January 2018), Embase Ovid (1 May 2015 to 24 January 2018) and CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 24 January 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. We searched the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any intervention for treating PEB, with male or female participants of any age, regardless of type of teeth (anterior or posterior, mandibular or maxillary). Trials could compare one type of intervention with another, with placebo, or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three pairs of review authors independently screened search records. We obtained full papers for potentially relevant trials. If data had been extracted, we would have followed the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for the statistical analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not find any randomised controlled trial suitable for inclusion in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We were unable to identify any reports of randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effects of different interventions for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding. In view of the lack of reliable evidence on this topic, clinicians must use their clinical experience to determine the most appropriate means of treating this condition, depending on patient-related factors. There is a need for well designed and appropriately conducted clinical trials on this topic, which conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Oral Hemorrhage; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 29502332
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011930.pub3 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis :... Oct 2023Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a cornerstone of adult venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment. Recently, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) represent a cornerstone of adult venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment. Recently, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating DOACs in pediatrics have been performed.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs in the pediatric population.
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from initiation up to August 20, 2022, for RCTs comparing DOACs to standard of care (SOC) in patients aged <18 years according to PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration CRD42022353870). The primary analysis was performed according to the anticoagulation intensity and clinical setting (ie, prophylaxis in cardiac disease or treatment in VTE). Efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality and VTE. Safety outcomes were major bleeding (MB), clinically relevant non-MB, any bleeding, serious adverse events, and discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
Seven RCTs were included in the systematic review and 6 in the meta-analysis (3 prophylaxis in cardiac disease and 3 treatment in VTE). DOACs showed a significant reduction of VTE recurrence for treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.94) and a nonsignificant reduction in VTE occurrence in prophylaxis (OR = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03-1.55). No differences were observed for any bleeding, serious AEs, and MB in prophylaxis. Nonsignificant trends were observed for clinically relevant non-MB, MB in treatment, and discontinuation due to AE in prophylaxis. We found a significant increase in discontinuation due to AE in treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
DOAC treatment seems to reduce VTE compared with SOC without major safety issues in the pediatric population, whereas DOAC prophylaxis seems at least comparable to SOC.
Topics: Humans; Child; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Hemorrhage; Blood Coagulation; Heart Diseases; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 37481075
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtha.2023.07.011