Prevalence and predictors of left atrial thrombosis in atrial fibrillation patients treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Filippo Angelini ◽  
Pier Paolo Bocchino ◽  
Mattia Peyracchia ◽  
Andrea Saglietto ◽  
Massimo Magnano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Atrial Thrombosis

scholarly journals Outcomes of left atrial appendage occlusion vs. non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wern Yew Ding ◽  
José Miguel Rivera-Caravaca ◽  
Elnara Fazio-Eynullayeva ◽  
Paula Underhill ◽  
Dhiraj Gupta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Left Atrial Appendage ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Atrial Appendage ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Suitable Alternative ◽  
Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion

Abstract Background The effects of left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion compared to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain unknown. Aims We aimed to evaluate the outcomes in patients with AF who received LAA occlusion vs. NOAC therapy. Methods We utilised data from TriNetX which is a global federated health research network currently containing data for 88.5 million patients. ICD-10 codes were employed to identify AF patients treated with either LAA occlusion or NOAC between 1st December 2010 and 17th January 2019. Clinical outcomes of interest were analysed up to 2 years. Results 108,697 patients were included. Patients who underwent LAA occlusion were younger, more likely to be white Caucasian and male, had a greater incidence of comorbidities, and were less likely to be prescribed other cardiovascular medications. Using propensity score matching, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly lower among patients who received LAA occlusion compared to NOAC therapy [1.51% vs. 5.60%, RR 0.27 (95% CI 0.14–0.54)], but there were no statistical differences in the composite thrombotic or thromboembolic events [8.17% vs. 7.72%, RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.73–1.53)], ischaemic stroke or TIA [4.69% vs. 5.45%, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.54–1.38)], venous thromboembolism [1.66% vs. 1.51%, RR 1.10 (95% CI 0.47–2.57)] and intracranial haemorrhage [1.51% vs. 1.51%, RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.42–2.39)]. Conclusion Overall, LAA occlusion might be a suitable alternative to NOAC therapy for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Graphical abstract

scholarly journals The Efficacy of Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in the Prevention of Left Atrial Thrombus in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Compared With Vitamin K Antagonists: A Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. E733-E739
Author(s):  
Jun Liu ◽  
Yiping Wu ◽  
Shurui Li ◽  
Lihong Song ◽  
Chengdong Hu
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Left Atrial Thrombus ◽  
Atrial Thrombus

Background: There is still a paucity of data on the efficacy of non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in the prevention of left atrial thrombus (LAT) formation before cardioversion or catheter ablation. To assess the efficacy of NOACs in the prevention of LAT in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), we conducted a meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. For meta-analysis, dichotomous variables were analyzed by using the odds ratios (OR) computed using the Mantel Haenszel method (random models). All results were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: A total of 13 studies (one randomized controlled investigation and 12 observational studies) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between the NOACs and VKAs groups with respect to the odds of LAT/LAAT formations (OR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.52-1.21; P = .29; (I2 = 14%). Conclusions: NOACs were as effective as VKAs in the prevention of LAT/LAAT formation in patients with NVAF. Though patients on NOACs therapy showed a lower incidence of LAT/LAAT formation compared with VKAs, it was not significant (P = .29).

scholarly journals Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and atrial thrombosis: An appraisal of current evidence

2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (10) ◽  
pp. 642-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Calabrò ◽  
Felice Gragnano ◽  
Arturo Cesaro ◽  
Fabio Marsico ◽  
Ivana Pariggiano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Atrial Thrombosis

scholarly journals The Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding between Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants and Vitamin K Antagonists in the Asian Atrial Fibrillation Patients: A Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Kuang-Tsu Yang ◽  
Wei-Chih Sun ◽  
Tzung-Jiun Tsai ◽  
Feng-Woei Tsay ◽  
Wen-Chi Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Optimal Dosage

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document