-
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 -
Health Science Reports Apr 2024Obesity affects nearly 650 million adults worldwide, and the prevalence is steadily rising. This condition has significant adverse effects on cardiovascular health,...
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Obesity affects nearly 650 million adults worldwide, and the prevalence is steadily rising. This condition has significant adverse effects on cardiovascular health, increasing the risk of hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation (AF). While anticoagulation for obese patients with AF is a well-established therapy for the prevention of thromboembolism, the safety and efficacy of different anticoagulants in this specific population are not well explored. This meta-analysis aimed to compare direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) to vitamin K antagonists in obese populations with AF.
METHODS
The PRISMA guidelines were followed for this meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023392711). PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched for relevant articles from inception through January 2023. Two independent authors screened titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review in Covidence. Data were extracted in Microsoft Excel and analyzed using RevMan v5.4 using odds ratio as an effect measure.
RESULTS
Two thousand two hundred fifty-nine studies were identified from the database search, and 18 were included in the analysis. There were statistically significant reductions in the odds of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in the DOAC group compared with the VKA group (OR 0.70, CI 0.66-0.75) and (OR 0.47, CI 0.35-0.62), respectively. In addition, the DOAC group exhibited lower odds of systemic embolism (OR 0.67, CI 0.54-0.83), major bleeding (OR 0.62, CI 0.54-0.72), and composite outcome (OR 0.72, CI 0.63-0.81).
CONCLUSION
Based on the findings from this meta-analysis, DOACs demonstrate superior safety and efficacy in obese patients with AF compared with VKAs. These results may have significant implications for guiding anticoagulation strategies in this patient population.
PubMed: 38650729
DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.2044 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Mar 2024: To review the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of low-dose-rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (LDR) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or...
Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Low-Dose Rivaroxaban in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
: To review the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of low-dose-rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (LDR) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) taking antiplatelets. : We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Efficacy endpoints were cardiovascular events (CVEs), myocardial infarction, stroke, all-cause, and cardiovascular death. Any, major, fatal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) were safety endpoints. Numbers needed to treat (NNT), and numbers needed to harm (NNH) were also calculated. : Seven RCTs were included with 45,836 patients: 34,276 with CAD and 11,560 with PAD. Overall, 4247 CVEs and 3082 bleedings were registered. LDR in association with either any antiplatelet drug or aspirin (ASA) alone reduced the risk of CVEs (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.78-0.94) and ischemic stroke (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.55-0.84). LDR + ASA increased the risk of major bleeding (HR 1.71, 95%CI 1.38-2.11) but no excess of fatal bleeding or ICH was found. The NNT to prevent one CVE for LDR + ASA was 63 (43-103) and the NNH to cause major bleeding was 107 (77-193). : The combination of LDR with either antiplatelet drugs or low-dose aspirin reduces CVEs and ischemic stroke in patients with CAD/PAD. There was an increased risk of major bleeding but no excess of fatal or ICH was found. LDR seems to have a favorable net clinical benefit compared to ASA treatment alone.
PubMed: 38610798
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13072033 -
Journal of the American Heart... Apr 2024Concomitant atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease is common and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Although oral anticoagulants have been well... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Concomitant atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease is common and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Although oral anticoagulants have been well established to prevent thromboembolism, the applicability in patients under long-term dialysis remains debatable. The study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in the dialysis-dependent population.
METHODS AND RESULTS
An updated network meta-analysis based on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Studies published up to December 2022 were included. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban 2.5/5 mg twice daily), vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and no anticoagulation were compared on safety and efficacy outcomes. The outcomes of interest were major bleeding, thromboembolism, and all-cause death. A total of 42 studies, including 3 randomized controlled trials, with 185 864 subjects were pooled. VKAs were associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than either no anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.34-1.61) or DOACs (DOACs versus VKAs; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.64-0.84]). For the prevention of thromboembolism, the efficacies of VKAs, DOACs, and no anticoagulation were equivalent. Nevertheless, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with fewer embolic events. There were no differences in all-cause death with the administration of VKAs, DOACs, or no anticoagulation.
CONCLUSIONS
For dialysis-dependent populations, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with better efficacy, while dabigatran and apixaban demonstrated better safety. No anticoagulation was a noninferior alterative, and VKAs were associated with the worst outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Atrial Fibrillation; Rivaroxaban; Dabigatran; Stroke; Network Meta-Analysis; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Fibrinolytic Agents; Administration, Oral; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Thromboembolism; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38606775
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.034176 -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) Apr 2024Cerebral venous thromboembolism (CVT) poses a significant risk of venous infarction and haemorrhage, which can lead to neurological deficits and, in severe cases, even... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cerebral venous thromboembolism (CVT) poses a significant risk of venous infarction and haemorrhage, which can lead to neurological deficits and, in severe cases, even death. The optimal treatment regimen for patients with CVT remains unclear.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science (WoS), and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with CVT. All-site venous thromboembolism (VTE), risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding, incidence of partial recanalization, complete recanalization and major haemorrhage were among outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
The analysis included 1 RCT and 3 observational studies containing 211 patients. Compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), rivaroxaban did not significantly decrease the all-site VTE [RR 0.31 (95% CI 0.01, 8.43); =0.49, I=0%]. Compared with VKAs, patients on rivaroxaban did not show a significantly reduced risk of recurrent cerebral venous thrombosis. In terms of incidence of partial recanalization, there was no discernible difference between rivaroxaban and VKAs [RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.66, 1.22); =0.49, I=0%]. There was no discernible difference in incidence of complete recanalization [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.32, 3.03); =0.97, I=28%] and incidence of major haemorrhage [RR 0.19 (95% CI 0.01, 4.54); =0.30].
CONCLUSION
Rivaroxaban was found to have similar efficacy to VKAs. Due to its lower risk of severe bleeding and no need for INR monitoring, rivaroxaban may be a preferable treatment option for CVT.
PubMed: 38576935
DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001689 -
JACC. CardioOncology Feb 2024Current guidelines recommend several direct oral anticoagulant agents (DOACs) equally for managing cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE).
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines recommend several direct oral anticoagulant agents (DOACs) equally for managing cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE).
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of DOACs in patients with active cancer.
METHODS
Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central in November 2022. Randomized controlled trials investigating anticoagulation strategies (vitamin K antagonists, parenteral anticoagulation [eg, low-molecular weight heparin], and DOACs) for VTE in patients with active cancer were identified for network meta-analysis. The outcomes included recurrent VTE, recurrent pulmonary embolism, recurrent deep venous thrombosis, major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB), and a composite outcome of major bleeding or CRNMB. Pooled HRs and 95% CIs were estimated using either the HR or relative risk provided from each study. Random-effects models were used for all the analyses.
RESULTS
Seventeen randomized controlled trials involving 6,623 patients with active cancer were included. No significant differences were found among the DOACs for efficacy outcomes (recurrent VTE, pulmonary embolism, and deep venous thrombosis). In terms of major bleeding, apixaban was similarly safe compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban but was associated with a decreased risk compared with edoxaban (HR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.15-0.93). Regarding CRNMB, edoxaban was similarly safe compared with apixaban but was associated with a decreased risk compared with rivaroxaban (HR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.10-0.91). Compared with parenteral anticoagulation, apixaban was associated with a reduced risk for recurrent VTE (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.38-0.93) without increasing bleeding, edoxaban was associated with an increased risk for major bleeding or CRNMB (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.02-1.79), and rivaroxaban was associated with an increased risk for CRNMB (HR: 3.76; 95% CI: 1.43-9.88).
CONCLUSIONS
DOACs demonstrate comparable efficacy but exhibit different safety profiles. Apixaban may confer an antithrombotic benefit without an increased risk for bleeding, distinguishing it from other contemporary anticoagulation strategies in patients with active cancer and VTE.
PubMed: 38510285
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccao.2023.10.009 -
Cureus Jan 2024Atrial fibrillation (AF) poses a substantial risk of stroke, necessitating effective anticoagulation therapy. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) evaluates... (Review)
Review
Atrial fibrillation (AF) poses a substantial risk of stroke, necessitating effective anticoagulation therapy. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) evaluates the efficacy and safety of different dosing regimens of rivaroxaban in patients with AF. A comprehensive search of relevant databases, focusing on studies published from 2017 onward, was conducted. Inclusion criteria comprised randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing standard and reduced dosing of rivaroxaban in AF. Data extraction and risk of bias (ROB) assessment were performed, and a meta-analysis was conducted for relevant outcomes. A total of 21 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Standard dosing demonstrates a slightly lower risk of composite effectiveness outcomes and safety outcomes (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.94, P=0.01) compared to reduced dosing (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71-0.97, P=0.02). Notable differences in major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), and intracranial bleeding favored standard dosing. Hemorrhagic stroke and all-cause stroke rates differed significantly, with standard dosing showing a more favorable profile for ischemic stroke prevention. This study highlights the pivotal role of personalized anticoagulation therapy in AF. Standard dosing of rivaroxaban emerges as a preferred strategy for stroke prevention, balancing efficacy and safety. Clinical decision-making should consider individual patient characteristics and future research should delve into specific subpopulations and long-term outcomes to further refine treatment guidelines. The study bridges evidence from clinical trials to real-world practice, offering insights into the evolving landscape of AF management.
PubMed: 38313978
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51541 -
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 -
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 -
Journal of Orthopaedics and... Jan 2024Several clinical investigations have compared different pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, no consensus has been reached.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several clinical investigations have compared different pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, no consensus has been reached. The present investigation compared enoxaparin, fondaparinux, aspirin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) commonly used as prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty (THA). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, setting as outcomes of interest the rate of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE) and major and minor haemorrhages.
METHODS
This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of healthcare interventions. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more drugs used for the prophylaxis of VTE following THA were accessed. PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were accessed in March 2023 with no time constraint.
RESULTS
Data from 31,705 patients were extracted. Of these, 62% (19,824) were women, with age, sex ratio, and body mass index (BMI) being comparable at baseline. Apixaban 5 mg, fondaparinux, and rivaroxaban 60 mg were the most effective in reducing the rate of DVT. Dabigatran 220 mg, apixaban 5 mg, and aspirin 100 mg were the most effective in reducing the rate of PE. Apixaban 5 mg, ximelagatran 2 mg and aspirin 100 mg were associated with the lowest rate of major haemorrhages, while rivaroxaban 2.5 mg, apixaban 5 mg and enoxaparin 40 mg were associated with the lowest rate of minor haemorrhages.
CONCLUSION
Administration of apixaban 5 mg demonstrated the best balance between VTE prevention and haemorrhage control following THA. Level of evidence Level I, network meta-analysis of RCTs.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Aspirin; Enoxaparin; Fibrinolytic Agents; Fondaparinux; Hemorrhage; Network Meta-Analysis; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 38194191
DOI: 10.1186/s10195-023-00742-2