-
American Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2024oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents are becoming the anticoagulation strategy of choice for most clinical risks for which they are indicated. However, residual uncertainty... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared with Warfarin in Patients with Low Bodyweight who have Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION
oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents are becoming the anticoagulation strategy of choice for most clinical risks for which they are indicated. However, residual uncertainty remains regarding their use in preventing stroke in patients with low bodyweight [< 60 kg or body mass index (BMI) < 18 kg/m]. We have carried out pooled systematic analyses of published studies to determine the efficacy and safety of these agents compared with warfarin in stroke prevention in patients with low bodyweight.
METHODS
We carried out a comprehensive search of electronic databases from inception to June 2023 for eligible studies reporting on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation who had low bodyweight. These include PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Science Citation Index, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness. Using the random effects model, derived pooled odd ratios (with their corresponding confidence intervals) of mortality outcomes in patient cohorts exposed to direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation who had low bodyweight.
RESULTS
Nine studies (n = 159,514 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. DOAC analogs were associated with lower stroke recurrence compared with warfarin [odds ratio (OR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.9]; however, there was no significant difference in the composite outcome (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.09) and mortality (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.48-1.41). Additionally, DOAC analogs showed a significant reduction in major bleeding events by 30% compared with warfarin (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62-0.80).
CONCLUSION
In this pooled meta-analytical synthesis of studies comprising both real-world and randomized controlled data, the use of DOAC analogs in patients with atrial fibrillation and low bodyweight (< 60 kg or BMI < 18 kg/m) was associated with a significant reduction in risks of stroke and major bleeding compared with patient cohorts stabilized on warfarin-based therapy. There was uncertainty regarding the composite outcome and mortality point estimate between these two anticoagulation strategies. This finding helps to resolve the uncertainty associated with the use of DOACs in this cohort. Additionally, it suggests the need for confirmatory non-inferiority randomized controlled trials evaluating DOACs versus warfarin in this cohort of patients.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Atrial Fibrillation; Anticoagulants; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 38386247
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-024-00628-6 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Feb 2024Determine the main complications of orthognathic surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate.
OBJECTIVE
Determine the main complications of orthognathic surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate.
METHODS
PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar were systematically reviewed. Studies addressing the complications of orthognathic surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate were included. For the search, the strategy was used with the descriptors extracted from MeSH "Cleft Palate", "Orthognathic Surgery" and "Complications". The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Patients of any sex, age, and ethnicity with cleft lip and palate submitted to orthognathic surgery were included in this systematic review. The study followed the PRISMA 2020 standards and was registered in PROSPERO with protocol CRD42020195927.
RESULTS
In the initial search, 1090 articles were found and after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, eleven studies were selected. The sample consisted of 629 patients who underwent Orthognathic Surgery, with an average age of 21.52 years. The majority of patients (390) presented unilateral transforamen proposals. In total, 150 complications were identified in the included studies, the most frequent being relapse of movement with 77 cases (51.3 %). Other reported, but less frequent, complications were gingival recession with root exposure, premaxillary mobility, intraoperative hemorrhage, fistulas and infection and velopharyngeal impairment. Most included studies did not have a control group, making meta-analysis unfeasible. Seven of the included studies presented a low risk of bias according to the NOS.
CONCLUSIONS
Orthognathic surgery in cleft patients is a safe procedure, however it presents particularities and more complications when compared to a non-cleft patient. In this study, the most common complication found was the relapse, and the surgeon must be aware of this complication and others, and try to minimize its negative effects on the patient. We strongly recommend further investigations with detailed methodologies, control groups, well-described criteria for reported complications, and comprehensive sample characteristics to provide higher-quality evidence.
PubMed: 38340958
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101795 -
Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology... Mar 2024Various studies have shown that oropharyngeal colostrum application (OPCA) is beneficial to preterm neonates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Various studies have shown that oropharyngeal colostrum application (OPCA) is beneficial to preterm neonates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether OPCA reduces the incidence of culture-proven neonatal sepsis in preterm neonates. Randomized controlled trials comparing OPCA with placebo or standard care in preterm neonates were included. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and CENTRAL were searched for studies published up to June 15, 2023. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2, for risk of bias assessment, the random-effects model (RevMan 5.4) for meta-analysis, and Gradepro software for assessing the certainty of evidence. Twenty-one studies involving 2393 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Four studies had a low risk of bias, whereas seven had a high risk. Oropharyngeal colostrum significantly reduced the incidence of culture-proven sepsis (18 studies, 1990 neonates, risk ratio [RR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.65, 0.94), mortality (18 studies, 2117 neonates, RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.90), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) (17 studies, 1692 neonates, RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.82), feeding intolerance episodes (four studies, 445 neonates, RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.92), and the time to full enteral feeding (19 studies, 2142 neonates, mean difference: -2 to 21 days, 95% CI: -3.44, -0.99 days). There was no reduction in intraventricular hemorrhage, retinopathy of prematurity, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, ventilator-associated pneumonia, neurodevelopmental abnormalities, hospital stay duration, time to full oral feeding, weight at discharge, pneumonia, and duration of antibiotic therapy. The certainty of the evidence was high for the outcomes of culture-positive sepsis and mortality, moderate for NEC, low for time to full enteral feeding, and very low for feeding intolerance. OPCA reduces culture-positive sepsis and mortality (high certainty), NEC (moderate certainty), and time to full enteral feeding (low certainty) in preterm neonates. However, scarcity of data from extremely premature infants limits the generalizability of these results to this population.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Neonatal Sepsis; Colostrum; Infant, Premature; Sepsis; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing
PubMed: 38314925
DOI: 10.1002/jpn3.12085 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis Mar 2024In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and normal or slightly impaired renal function, the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is preferable to vitamin K... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and stage 5 chronic kidney disease under dialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and normal or slightly impaired renal function, the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is preferable to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). However, in patients undergoing hemodialysis, the efficacy, and safety of DOACs compared with VKAs are still unknown.
PURPOSE
To review current evidence about the safety and efficacy of DOACs compared to VKAs, in patients with AF and chronic kidney disease under hemodialysis.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for RCTs comparing DOACs with VKAs for anticoagulation in patients with AF on dialysis therapy. Outcomes of interest were: (1) stroke; (2) major bleeding; (3) cardiovascular mortality; and (4) all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1.7 and heterogeneity was assessed by I statistics.
RESULTS
Three randomized controlled trials were included, comprising a total of 383 patients. Of these, 218 received DOACs (130 received apixaban; 88 received rivaroxaban), and 165 were treated with VKAs (116 received warfarin; 49 received phenprocoumon). The incidence of stroke was significantly lower in patients treated with DOACs (4.7%) compared with those using VKAs (9.5%) (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18-0.97; p = 0.04; I = 0%). However, the difference was not statistically significant in the case of ischemic stroke specifically (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.17-1.04; p = 0.06; I = 0%). As for the major bleeding outcome, the DOAC group (11%) had fewer events than the VKA group (13.9%) but without statistical significance (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.45-1.28; p = 0.29; I = 0%). There was no significant difference between groups regarding cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.23; 95% CI 0.66-2.29; p = 0.52; I = 13%) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77-1.24; p = 0.84; I = 16%).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that in patients with AF on dialysis, the use of DOACs was associated with a significant reduction in stroke, and a numerical trend of less incidence of major bleeding compared with VKAs, but in this case with no statistical significance. Results may be limited by a small sample size or insufficient statistical power.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Renal Dialysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Stroke; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Fibrinolytic Agents; Vitamin K; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 38281231
DOI: 10.1007/s11239-023-02945-0 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Jan 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently observed cardiac arrhythmia in clinical settings. Obesity can influence the efficacy of the treatment administered, which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently observed cardiac arrhythmia in clinical settings. Obesity can influence the efficacy of the treatment administered, which requires a larger dose and more time to accomplish therapeutic targets due to altered pathophysiology. Our study aimed to assess the overall efficacy and safety of nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in AF patients with morbid obesity (BMI > 40 kg/m2 and/or weight > 120 kg) to prevent complications.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus till October 2022 for articles addressing the efficacy and safety of NOACs versus warfarin for the treatment of AF in morbidly obese patients. We performed the meta-analysis with RevMan software version 5.4 and Open Meta Analyst. The main outcomes assessed were stroke, major bleeding, and minor bleeding after anticoagulation, as did the history of comorbidities and risk factors in morbidly obese patients. Quality assessment was performed using Cochrane's ROB-2 tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
RESULTS
Regarding major bleeding events, pooled data showed that patients taking NOACs had a significantly lower risk than patients taking warfarin (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: [0.41-0.70]; p < 0.00001). However, for minor bleeding, there was a nonsignificant effect of NOACs on reducing the risk of bleeding (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.47-1.09; p = 0.12), which became highly significant in favor of NOACs after sensitivity analysis (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.49-0.61]; p < 0.00001). There was a significant difference in the incidence of stroke between the NOAC group and the warfarin group (OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.60-0.80]; p < 0.00001). According to the results of the single-arm study analysis, the overall effect of all the outcomes was associated with a high risk of disease development in patients receiving NOACs.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis showed a favorable effect of NOACs vs warfarin in morbidly obese patients. Some outcomes were not significantly different, which calls for future research to better assess their safety and efficacy in this particular weight group.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The study was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42022362493 on October 2022.
Topics: Humans; Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Hemorrhage; Obesity, Morbid; Stroke; Treatment Outcome; Warfarin
PubMed: 38279126
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03731-3 -
Surgical Endoscopy Mar 2024The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis of abdominal/pelvic cancer-related... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal/pelvic cancer-related surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as an alternative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for extended thromboprophylaxis of abdominal/pelvic cancer-related postoperative thromboembolism (VTE) is unclear. We aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of DOACs vs. LMWH in these patients.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Web of science through May 19th, 2023 for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared the outcomes with DOACs vs. LMWH for extended thromboprophylaxis among patients undergoing abdominal/pelvic cancer surgery. Primary efficacy outcome was clinical VTE, and safety outcome was clinically relevant bleeding complications reported within the 30-day postoperative period. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023413175).
RESULTS
We identified 5078 articles and selected 29 full-text articles for eligibility. A total of 9 studies (2 RCTs and 7 observational studies) encompassing 2651 patients were included for systematic review and 7 for meta-analysis. When compared with LMWH extended thromboprophylaxis, DOACs had a similar incidence of VTE (RR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.32-1.33], I = 0%), major bleeding (RR: 1.68 [95% CI: 0.36-7.9], I = 26%), and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.39-1.19], I = 0%). Subgroup analysis suggested no difference according to the study type (RCTs versus observational studies) regarding clinical VTE or major bleeding (P = 0.43 and P = 0.71, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Our results suggest that DOACs for extended thromboprophylaxis were an effective and safe alternative to LMWH after major abdominal/pelvic cancer-related surgery.
Topics: Humans; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Anticoagulants; Pelvic Neoplasms; Venous Thromboembolism; Hemorrhage; Neoplasms
PubMed: 38267639
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10649-y -
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 -
American Journal of Health-system... Jun 2024Oral anticoagulants (OACs) and aspirin can trigger bleeding events when used alone or in combination. The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of any type of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Oral anticoagulants (OACs) and aspirin can trigger bleeding events when used alone or in combination. The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of any type of bleeding in individuals exposed to a combination of OAC and aspirin with the risk in those taking an OAC or aspirin alone.
METHODS
MEDLINE and Web of Science were queried in January 2021 for eligible articles. Studies were included if they were either randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies and evaluated the number of any bleeding events in two groups, one with exposure to both OAC and aspirin and one with exposure to OAC alone or aspirin alone. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies were included. In an analysis of 15 RCTs and 19 observational studies evaluating OAC plus aspirin versus OAC alone, a significant difference in the risk of bleeding was observed in the combination groups, with an odds ratio [OR] of, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.15-1.59) for RCTs and an OR of 1.42 (95% CI-, 1.09-1.87) for observational studies. When OAC plus aspirin was compared to aspirin alone, a higher rate of bleeding was found in the combination group (OR, 2.36; 95%CI, 1.91-2.92) in the analysis of 15 RCTs, but no significant difference was found among 10 observational studies (OR, 1.93; 95% Cl, 0.99-3.75).
CONCLUSION
The risk of any type of bleeding was significantly increased among patients taking aspirin plus OAC compared to those taking OAC alone in both RCTs and observational studies. Evaluation of RCTs comparing OAC plus aspirin to aspirin alone suggests increased bleeding risk as well.
Topics: Aspirin; Humans; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Administration, Oral; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38263263
DOI: 10.1093/ajhp/zxae010 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the most common complications after major orthopaedic surgery. Recent studies have suggested that aspirin may also be effective...
Comparison of efficacy and safety between aspirin and oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after major orthopaedic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the most common complications after major orthopaedic surgery. Recent studies have suggested that aspirin may also be effective in preventing VTE, but it is still controversial whether it can be routinely used. To compare the efficacy and safety of aspirin against oral anticoagulants in the prevention of VTE following total hip arthroplasty (THA), total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or hip fracture surgery (HFS). Relevant publications have been obtained using electronic search databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials. gov. from inception to 20 July 2023. Only RCTs evaluating the efficacy and safety of aspirin compared with oral anticoagulants undergoing major orthopaedic surgery were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome reported was any VTE event (including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE)). Secondary outcomes included mortality, major bleeding (including gastrointestinal bleed, cerebrovascular hemorrhage, or any bleeding requiring a return to the theater), minor bleeding (ecchymosis, epistaxis, hematuria), and wound complications. The risk of bias for all included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. After screening 974 studies, 12 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included, involving 5,088 participants, including 2,540 participants in aspirin, 2,205 participants in rivaroxaban, and 323 participants in warfarin. Aspirin was found to be less effective than oral anticoagulants in thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery (RR = 1.206, 95% CI 1.053-1.383). After subgroup analysis according to the type of oral anticoagulant, the results showed that aspirin was similar to rivaroxaban and inferior to warfarin. Considering that the studies in the warfarin group were all conducted before 2000, our results need to be further confirmed. In addition, the aspirin group had a higher risk of VTE than the control group in other subgroups, including a follow-up time of ≤3 months, type of procedure as TKA, high-dose aspirin (≥650 mg qd), and no combined use of mechanical prophylaxis. In terms of safety events, aspirin did not show significant differences in major bleeding (RR = 0.952, 95% CI 0.499-1.815), all-cause mortality (RR = 1.208, 95% CI 0.459-3.177), and wound-related events (RR = 0.618, 95% CI 0.333-1.145) compared with oral anticoagulants, and aspirin was associated with a reduction in the risk of minor bleeding (RR = 0.685, 95% CI 0.552-0.850) events and total bleeding (RR = 0.726, 95% CI 0.590-0.892). Aspirin reduces bleeding risk after major orthopedic surgery compared with oral anticoagulants, but may sacrifice VTE prevention to some extent. Updated evidence is needed to analyze the thromboprophylaxis effects of aspirin in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=463481, identifier CRD42023463481.
PubMed: 38259284
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1326224 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Mar 2024An increasing number of patients are undergoing gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with active prescriptions of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Only a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
An increasing number of patients are undergoing gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) with active prescriptions of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Only a few reports have described the effects of DOAC intake on postoperative bleeding. We aimed to investigate the bleeding risk associated with DOACs after gastric ESD.
METHODS
Clinical studies published up to April 2022 showing bleeding rates after gastric ESD in patients taking DOACs were identified using electronic searches. The primary outcome was the rate of bleeding after gastric ESD in patients receiving DOACs compared to those not receiving antithrombotic therapy. In this meta-analysis, odds ratios (ORs) were calculated and pooled using a random effects model. The secondary outcome was the difference in the bleeding rate between patients treated with DOACs and those treated with warfarin and antiplatelet drugs.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that DOACs had a higher bleeding rate than non-thrombotic therapy (17.0% vs. 3.4%; OR 5.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.33-7.54; I = 0%). The bleeding risk associated with DOAC administration was similar to that associated with warfarin (17.0% vs. 20.0%; OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.59-1.18; I = 0%), whereas it was higher than that associated with antiplatelet administration (16.9% vs. 11.0%; OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.14-2.34; I = 8%).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis reveals that the bleeding risk of DOACs is higher than that of non-antithrombotics and antiplatelets, whereas it is comparable to that of warfarin. Gastric ESD in patients on anticoagulants requires careful postoperative management.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Stomach Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Anticoagulants; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38252209
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-024-08271-6