A network meta-analysis of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Hao Jin ◽  
Kongbo Zhu ◽  
Lina Wang ◽  
Hong Zhi
Author(s):  
Kuang-Tsu Yang ◽  
Wei-Chih Sun ◽  
Tzung-Jiun Tsai ◽  
Feng-Woei Tsay ◽  
Wen-Chi Chen ◽  
...  

Background: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are more commonly used to prevent atrial fibrillation (AF) patients from thromboembolic events than vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). However, the gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) risk in the Asian AF patients associated with NOACs in comparison with VKAs remained unaddressed. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of studies on NOACs and VKAs in the Asian AF patients was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The primary outcome was the hazard ratio (HR) of any GIB associated with NOACs versus VKAs. The secondary outcome was the GIB risks in different kinds of NOACs compared with VKAs. Results: This meta-analysis included two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four retrospective studies, comprising at least 200,000 patients in total. A significantly lower HR of GIB risks was found in all kinds of NOACs than VKAs in the Asian AF patients (HR: 0.633; 95% confidence interval: 0.535–0.748; p < 0.001). Additionally, the GIB risks of different NOACs were apixaban (HR: 0.392), edoxaban (HR: 0.603), dabigatran (HR: 0.685), and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.794), respectively. Conclusions: NOACs significantly reduced the risk of GIB in the Asian AF patients compared with VKAs. In the four NOACs compared with VKAs, apixaban probably had a trend of the least GIB risk. We need further head-to-head studies of different NOACs to confirm which NOAC is the most suitable for Asian AF patients and to know the optimal dosage regimen of different NOACs.


2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1a
Author(s):  
Peter Kelly ◽  
Carlos Molina ◽  
Christian T. Ruff ◽  
Roland Veltkamp ◽  
◽  
...  

The rising incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasingly resulting in a substantial worldwide increase in AF-related stroke, particularly in elderly patients and this is creating an increasingly serious healthcare burden. Guidelines recommend the use of AF-related stroke prophylaxis but adherence to these remains poor. Studies conducted in the 1990s showed that warfarin reduced the risk of AF-related stroke by an overall 64% compared with placebo. Subsequently, prophylactic treatment was further improved with the development of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). More recently, a meta-analysis of four large clinical trials on NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) showed there was a relative risk reduction of 0.81 (p<0.0001) favouring NOAC treatment over warfarin for stroke or systemic embolic events in patients with AF. The largest trial of NOACs in AF-related stroke, to date, was the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 study (n=21,105) which showed that edoxaban was non-inferior to warfarin for ischaemic stroke reduction but significantly reduced bleeding and cardiovascular mortality. A recent subgroup analysis of this study showed that with edoxaban the incidences of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) subtypes (all ICH, fatal ICH, fatal, subdural and epidural bleed) were significantly lower with 60 mg of edoxaban (p=0.013–<0.001). Edoxaban was also shown to be an effective option in patients with prior stroke. In addition, edoxaban was shown to reduce deaths due to fatal bleeds compared with warfarin. The results of current studies, especially the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 subgroup analysis therefore, show that the benefits of anticoagulation therapy in patients with AF substantially outweigh the risks.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi-Hsin Chan ◽  
Hsin-Fu Lee ◽  
Pei-Ru Li ◽  
Jia-Rou Liu ◽  
Tze-Fan Chao ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Evidence of adverse clinical outcomes for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus are limited. We investigated the effectiveness, safety, and major adverse limb events for NOACs versus warfarin among diabetic AF patients. Methods: In this nationwide retrospective cohort study collected from Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified a total of 20,967 and 5,812 consecutive AF patients with diabetes taking NOACs and warfarin from June 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, respectively. We used propensity-score stabilized weighting to balance covariates across study groups. Results: NOAC was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR):0.88; [95% confidential interval (CI):0.78-0.99]; P =0.0283), major adverse limb events (aHR:0.72;[95%CI:0.57-0.92]; P =0.0083), and major bleeding (aHR:0.67;[95%CI:0.59-0.76]; P <.0001) compared to warfarin. NOACs decreased MACE in patients of 75 but not in those aged <75 years ( P interaction=0.01), and in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) compared to those without IHD ( P interaction<0.01). For major adverse limb events, the advantage of risk reduction for NOAC over warfarin persisted in high risk subgroups including age 75 years, chronic kidney disease, IHD, peripheral artery disease, or use of concomitant antiplatelet drugs. Conclusion: NOACs were associated with a lower risk of effectiveness, safety, and major adverse limb events than warfarin among diabetic AF patients. Thromboprophylaxis with NOACs should be considered in the diabetic AF population with a high atherosclerotic burden.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document