-
Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis Feb 2022Patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the infectious pathology caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome...
Patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the infectious pathology caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, have a high risk of thrombosis, though the precise mechanisms behind this remain unclarified. A systematic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE identified 18 prospective studies applying dynamic coagulation assays in ICU COVID-19 patients. Overall, these studies revealed normal or slightly reduced primary hemostasis, prolonged clot initiation, but increased clot firmness. Thrombin generation assay parameters generally were equivalent to the control groups or within reference range. Fibrinolysis assays showed increased clot resistance. Only six studies related their findings to clinical outcome. We also prospectively included 51 COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Blood samples were examined on day 1, 3-4, and 7-8 with platelet function tests, rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM), in vivo and ex vivo thrombin generation, and clot lysis assay. Data on thrombosis, bleeding, and mortality were recorded during 30 days. Primary hemostasis was comparable to healthy controls, but COVID-19 patients had longer ROTEM-clotting times and higher maximum clot firmness than healthy controls. Ex vivo thrombin generation was similar to that of healthy controls while in vivo thrombin generation markers, thrombin-antithrombin (TAT) complex, and prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1 + 2) were higher in ICU COVID-19 patients than in healthy controls. Impaired fibrinolysis was present at all time points. TAT complex and F1 + 2 levels were significantly higher in patients developing thrombosis ( = 16) than in those without. In conclusion, only few previous studies employed dynamic hemostasis assays in COVID-19 ICU-patients and failed to reveal a clear association with development of thrombosis. In ICU COVID-19 patients, we confirmed normal platelet aggregation, while in vivo thrombin generation was increased and fibrinolysis decreased. Thrombosis may be driven by increased thrombin formation in vivo.
Topics: Blood Coagulation Tests; COVID-19; Cohort Studies; Critical Care; Fibrinolysis; Hemostasis; Humans; Prospective Studies; SARS-CoV-2; Thrombelastography; Thrombin; Thrombosis
PubMed: 34715692
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735454 -
BMJ Evidence-based Medicine Aug 2022To assess cost-effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) by... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Economic evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess cost-effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) by pooling incremental net benefits (INBs).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
We searched PubMed, Scopus and Centre for Evaluation of Value and Risks in Health Registry from inception to December 2019.
PARTICIPANTS
Patients with AF.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The INB was defined as a difference of incremental effectiveness multiplied by willing to pay threshold minus the incremental cost; a positive INB indicated favour treatment. These INBs were pooled (stratified by level of country income, perspective, time-horizon, model types) with a random-effects model if heterogeneity existed, otherwise a fixed effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was assessed using Q test and I statistic. Risk of bias was assessed using the economic evaluations bias (ECOBIAS) checklist.
RESULTS
A total of 100 eligible economic evaluation studies (224 comparisons) were included. For high-income countries (HICs) from a third-party payer (TPP) perspective, the pooled INBs for DOAC versus VKA pairs were significantly cost-effective with INBs (95% CI) of $6632 ($2961.67 to $10 303.72; I=59.9%), $6353.24 ($4076.03 to $8630.45; I=0%), $7664.58 ($2979.79 to $12 349.37; I=0%) and $8573.07 ($1877.05 to $15 269.09; I=0%) for dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban and edoxaban relative to VKA, respectively but only dabigatran was significantly cost-effective from societal perspective (SP) with an INB of $11 746.96 ($2429.34 to $21 064.59; I=52.4%). The pooled INBs of all comparisons for upper-middle income countries (UMICs) were not significantly cost-effective. The ECOBIAS checklist indicated that risk of bias was mostly low for most items with the exception of five items which should be less influenced on pooling INBs.
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analysis provides comprehensive economic evidence that allows policy makers to generalise cost-effectiveness data to their local context. All DOACs may be cost-effective compared with VKA in HICs with TPP perspective. The pooling results produced moderate to high heterogeneity particularly in UMICs. Further studies are required to inform UMICs with SP.
PROSPERO REGISTERATION NUMBER
CRD 42019146610.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dabigatran; Fibrinolytic Agents; Humans; Stroke; Vitamin K
PubMed: 34635480
DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111634 -
Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2021The guidelines on antithrombotic treatment in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing peripheral revascularization of the lower extremities... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban Compared with Other Therapies Used in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease Undergoing Peripheral Revascularization: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
The guidelines on antithrombotic treatment in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing peripheral revascularization of the lower extremities were developed based on heterogeneous trials, assessing various dose regimens and recruiting patients who were subjected to different revascularization procedures.
OBJECTIVE
To compare efficacy and safety of treatments used in patients with PAD undergoing peripheral revascularization accounting for between-trial heterogeneity and large dispersion of the quality of evidence.
METHODS
A systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adult patients with PAD receiving antithrombotics was conducted until January 2020. Hazard ratios (HR) were pooled using Bayesian network meta-analysis. The estimated between-treatment effects were presented as HR together with 95% credible intervals. The base case analysis included studies recruiting patients following recent peripheral revascularization, who received treatment regimens administered within the recommended therapeutic window, while a sensitivity scenario included all identified trials.
RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs were identified (8 RCTs enrolled patients following peripheral revascularization and 5 RCTs regardless of the previous revascularization). Five trials, recruiting an overall of 8349 patients, were considered for the base case analysis. Of those, 6564 patients were recruited in the VOYAGER PAD trial comparing rivaroxaban plus aspirin (RIV plus ASA) versus ASA. RIV plus ASA was associated with a lower risk of repeated peripheral revascularization versus ASA monotherapy (HR = 0.88 [0.79, 0.99]), however having a trend towards an increased rate of major bleeding (HR = 1.43 [0.98, 2.11]). There was no evidence for differences between RIV plus ASA and dual antiplatelet therapy and vitamin K antagonists plus ASA. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
RIV plus ASA is associated with reduced risk of revascularization compared with ASA monotherapy, but the evidence for other comparators, in particular antiplatelet regimens, was insufficient to guide treatment decisions and highlights the challenge in establishing the magnitude of comparative efficacy using existing RCTs.
Topics: Adult; Aspirin; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Rivaroxaban
PubMed: 34497668
DOI: 10.1155/2021/8561350 -
European Review For Medical and... Aug 2021To compare the outcomes between direct-acting oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists, particularly for risk of stroke and bleeding, among patients with atrial... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparison of outcomes of direct-acting oral anticoagulants vs. vitamin K antagonists in patients with bioprosthetic heart valves or valve repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the outcomes between direct-acting oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists, particularly for risk of stroke and bleeding, among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and bioprosthetic heart valve replacement or repair.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Google scholar databases. Studies that were done in patients with AF who underwent bioprosthetic heart valve replacement or repair and that compared the outcomes between the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists were eligible for inclusion. Studies that were preferably randomized controlled trials or adopted a cohort approach or retrospective data-based studies were considered for inclusion. The strength of association was presented in the form of pooled hazards risk (HR). Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 16.0.
RESULTS
A total of 8 articles were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the risk of "all-cause stroke" [HR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.39, 1.34] and ischemic stroke [HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.49, 1.29] between the two groups. The risk of "any bleeding" [HR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.87], major bleeding [HR 0.60, 95% CI: 0.42, 0.86] and intra-cranial bleeding [HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.81] was much lower in those that received DOAC compared to warfarin. Compared to those receiving warfarin, those on DOACs had substantially reduced risk of any clinical thromboembolic events [HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39, 0.70]. No significant differences were noted for all-cause mortality [HR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.74, 1.05], cardiovascular events/myocardial infarction (MI) [HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.33, 1.04] and and readmission rates [HR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.62, 1.18].
CONCLUSIONS
Findings suggest that the use DOACs in patients with AF with bioprosthetic valve replacement or repair is comparatively better than vitamin K antagonists in reducing the risk of bleeding and thrombo-embolic events. Future studies with a randomized design and larger sample sizes are needed to further substantiate these findings.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Valves; Humans; Vitamin K
PubMed: 34355372
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202108_26457 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Jul 2021To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Xa inhibitors in patients with heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and safety of Xa inhibitors in patients with heart failure and coronary or peripheral artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Xa inhibitors in patients with heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD).
METHODS
A systematic electronic literature search was performed using the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 26, 2019. A total of four randomized controlled trials involving 14,694 patients were included in this meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis showed that there was no statistical difference between the Xa inhibitor and control group regarding the primary efficacy outcome [rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group: relative risk (RR) 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66-1.01, P=0.06; rivaroxaban 5 mg group: RR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.02, P=0.08]. The risk of the primary safety outcome was significantly increased among patients who received Xa inhibitors compared with the control group (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group: RR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.21-1.98, P=0.0006; rivaroxaban 5 mg group: RR 1.66, 95% CI: 1.30-2.12, P<0.0001). There was no significant difference in the risk of cardiovascular death between the Xa inhibitor and control group (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group: RR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.54-1.14, P=0.21; rivaroxaban 5 mg group: RR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.73-1.08, P=0.24). The risk of myocardial infarction (MI) in the rivaroxaban 5 mg group was significantly lower than that of the control group (RR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.69-0.99, P=0.04). However, the risk of MI in the rivaroxaban 2.5 mg group was similar to that of the control group (RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.71-1.01, P=0.07).
DISCUSSION
Xa inhibitors were associated with a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding among HF and CAD or PAD patients. Therefore, Xa inhibitors should be used cautiously in patients with HF and CAD or PAD.
Topics: Factor Xa Inhibitors; Heart Failure; Humans; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban
PubMed: 34353093
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-1645 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Feb 2022The results of associations between new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and wound complications after total joint arthroplasty remain inconsistent. We conducted a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Wound complications and bleeding with new oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
AIMS
The results of associations between new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and wound complications after total joint arthroplasty remain inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to make comparisons with low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) on the clinical outcomes of total wound complications, together with other efficacy and safety endpoints to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of NOACs.
METHODS
This meta-analysis was conducted based on a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42019140841). We searched for available articles in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library through Jun 62 021. Random-effects meta-analyses, including subgroup analyses, were conducted to estimate the pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for specific doses of NOACs.
RESULTS
We retrieved 1683 studies, of which 20 were eligible for inclusion. We found that apixaban was associated with a lower incidence of total wound complications compared with LMWH (RR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.65-1.00), while dabigatran and rivaroxaban did not increase the risk of total wound complications. In addition, apixaban was associated with a reduction in the risk of major/clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events compared to LMWH (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99), while rivaroxaban increased the risk for major/clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.02-1.50). Moreover, all 4 NOACs were associated with lower incidences of major venous thromboembolism compared with LMWH.
CONCLUSION
A lower risk of wound complications was detected for apixaban, while dabigatran and rivaroxaban did not increase the risk when compared with LMWH. The efficacy of 4 NOACs was broadly similar.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Arthroplasty; Dabigatran; Hemorrhage; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 34322914
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15005 -
Clinical Cardiology Sep 2021To assess the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) after the use of rivaroxaban or warfarin. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin on the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
To assess the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) after the use of rivaroxaban or warfarin. To investigate the effects of rivaroxaban and warfarin on gastrointestinal and intracranial hemorrhage in patients with AF, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Medline from the establishment of databases up to 2020. We finally included 38 observational studies involving 1 312 609 patients for the assessment of intracranial hemorrhage, and 33 observational studies involving 1 332 956 patients for the assessment of gastrointestinal bleeding. The rates of intracranial hemorrhage were 0.55% in the rivaroxaban group versus 0.91% in the warfarin group (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.53-0.66; p < .00001, I2 = 78%). The rates of gastrointestinal bleeding were 2.63% in patients with rivaroxaban versus 2.48% in those with warfarin (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.96-1.17; p < .00001, I2 = 94%). Rivaroxaban could significantly reduce the risk of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with AF than warfarin, but the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding remained controversy due to no statistical significant difference. Notably, a subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients in rivaroxaban group with severe chronic renal diseases or undergoing hemodialysis exposed to less gastrointestinal hemorrhage risk than the group from warfarin.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Dabigatran; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Humans; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Warfarin
PubMed: 34302375
DOI: 10.1002/clc.23690 -
RMD Open Jul 2021Despite vitamin K antagonists (VKA) being the gold standard in the prevention of thromboembolic events in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), non-vitamin K antagonists oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Despite vitamin K antagonists (VKA) being the gold standard in the prevention of thromboembolic events in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), non-vitamin K antagonists oral anticoagulants/direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been used off-label.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to perform a systematic review comparing DOACs to VKA regarding prevention of thromboembolic events, occurrence of bleeding events and mortality in patients with APS.
METHODS
An electronic database search was performed through MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Web of Science. After data extraction, we pooled the results using risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I². The outcomes considered were all thromboembolic events as primary, and major bleeding, all bleeding events and mortality as secondary. Evidence confidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology.
RESULTS
We included 7 studies and a total of 835 patients for analyses. Thromboembolic events were significantly increased in DOACs arm, compared with VKA-RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.62, I²-24%, n=719, 6 studies. In studies using exclusively rivaroxaban, which was the most representative drug in all included studies, the thromboembolic risk was increased threefold (RR 3.36, 95% CI 1.53 to 7.37). The risks of major bleeding, all bleeding events and mortality were not significantly different from control arm. The grade of certainty of our results is very low.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests DOACs use, particularly rivaroxaban, among patients with APS, is less effective than VKA since it is associated with 69% increased risk of thromboembolic events.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020216178.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Antiphospholipid Syndrome; Hemorrhage; Humans; Rivaroxaban; Vitamin K
PubMed: 34253684
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2021-001678 -
Frontiers in Neurology 2021Acute stroke treatment is a time-critical process in which every minute counts. Laboratory biomarkers are needed to aid clinical decisions in the diagnosis. Although...
Acute stroke treatment is a time-critical process in which every minute counts. Laboratory biomarkers are needed to aid clinical decisions in the diagnosis. Although imaging is critical for this process, these biomarkers may provide additional information to distinguish actual stroke from its mimics and monitor patient condition and the effect of potential neuroprotective strategies. For such biomarkers to be effectively scalable to public health in any economic setting, these must be cost-effective and non-invasive. We hypothesized that blood-based combinations (panels) of proteins might be the key to this approach and explored this possibility through a systematic review. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines for systematic review. Initially, the broader search for biomarkers for early stroke diagnosis yielded 704 hits, and five were added manually. We then narrowed the search to combinations (panels) of the protein markers obtained from the blood. Twelve articles dealing with blood-based panels of protein biomarkers for stroke were included in the systematic review. We observed that NR2 peptide (antibody against the NR2 fragment) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are brain-specific markers related to stroke. Von Willebrand factor (vWF), matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9), and S100β have been widely used as biomarkers, whereas others such as the ischemia-modified albumin (IMA) index, antithrombin III (AT-III), and fibrinogen have not been evaluated in combination. We herein propose the following new combination of biomarkers for future validation: panel 1 (NR2 + GFAP + MMP-9 + vWF + S100β), panel 2 (NR2 + GFAP + MMP-9 + vWF + IMA index), and panel 3 (NR2 + GFAP + AT-III + fibrinogen). More research is needed to validate, identify, and introduce these panels of biomarkers into medical practice for stroke recurrence and diagnosis in a scalable manner. The evidence indicates that the most promising approach is to combine different blood-based proteins to provide diagnostic precision for health interventions. Through our systematic review, we suggest three novel biomarker panels based on the results in the literature and an interpretation based on stroke pathophysiology.
PubMed: 34122297
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.638693 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021People with chronic heart failure (HF) are at risk of thromboembolic events, including stroke, pulmonary embolism, and peripheral arterial embolism; coronary ischaemic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
People with chronic heart failure (HF) are at risk of thromboembolic events, including stroke, pulmonary embolism, and peripheral arterial embolism; coronary ischaemic events also contribute to the progression of HF. The use of long-term oral anticoagulation is established in certain populations, including people with HF and atrial fibrillation (AF), but there is wide variation in the indications and use of oral anticoagulation in the broader HF population.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether long-term oral anticoagulation reduces total deaths and stroke in people with heart failure in sinus rhythm.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated the searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in March 2020. We screened reference lists of papers and abstracts from national and international cardiovascular meetings to identify unpublished studies. We contacted relevant authors to obtain further data. We did not apply any language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing oral anticoagulants with placebo or no treatment in adults with HF, with treatment duration of at least one month. We made inclusion decisions in duplicate, and resolved any disagreements between review authors by discussion, or a third party.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, and assessed the risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy by calculating odds ratio (OR), accompanied by the 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We identified three RCTs (5498 participants). One RCT compared warfarin, aspirin, and no antithrombotic therapy, the second compared warfarin with placebo in participants with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, and the third compared rivaroxaban with placebo in participants with HF and coronary artery disease. We pooled data from the studies that compared warfarin with a placebo or no treatment. We are uncertain if there is an effect on all-cause death (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.18; 2 studies, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence); warfarin may increase the risk of major bleeding events (OR 5.98, 95% CI 1.71 to 20.93, NNTH 17). 2 studies, 324 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported stroke as an individual outcome. Rivaroxaban makes little to no difference to all-cause death compared with placebo (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13; 1 study, 5022 participants; high-certainty evidence). Rivaroxaban probably reduces the risk of stroke compared to placebo (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; NNTB 101; 1 study, 5022 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably increases the risk of major bleeding events (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.33; NNTH 79; 1 study, 5008 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the three RCTs, there is no evidence that oral anticoagulant therapy modifies mortality in people with HF in sinus rhythm. The evidence is uncertain if warfarin has any effect on all-cause death compared to placebo or no treatment, but it may increase the risk of major bleeding events. There is no evidence of a difference in the effect of rivaroxaban on all-cause death compared to placebo. It probably reduces the risk of stroke, but probably increases the risk of major bleedings. The available evidence does not support the routine use of anticoagulation in people with HF who remain in sinus rhythm.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated; Chronic Disease; Heart Failure; Heart Rate; Hemorrhage; Humans; Placebo Effect; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rivaroxaban; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Warfarin
PubMed: 34002371
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003336.pub4