4.7 Review

Novel Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Current Clinical Evidence and Future Developments

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 56, Issue 25, Pages 2067-2076

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.017

Keywords

anticoagulants; atrial fibrillation; thrombin inhibitor

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [KFO 196]
  2. Wissenschaftsministerium des Saarlandes (Klinische Studiengruppe)
  3. Boehringer Ingelheim
  4. Sanofi-Aventis
  5. Cardiome
  6. ARYx
  7. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  8. MSD
  9. St. Jude Medical
  10. Medtronic
  11. Biotronik
  12. Boehringer
  13. Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb
  14. Sanofi
  15. Astellas
  16. Merck
  17. Portola
  18. Biotronic
  19. Daiichi-Sankyo
  20. AstraZeneca
  21. Pfizer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac rhythm disorder and a major risk factor for ischemic stroke. Antithrombotic therapy using aspirin or vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is currently prescribed for prevention for ischemic stroke in patients with AF. A narrow therapeutic range and the need of regular monitoring of its anticoagulatory effect impair effectiveness and safety of VKA, causing a need for alternative anticoagulant drugs. Recently developed anticoagulants include direct thrombin antagonists such as dabigatran or factor Xa inhibitors such as rivaroxaban, apixaban, betrixaban, and edoxaban. Currently, data from a phase III clinical trial are available for dabigatran only, which show the direct thrombin antagonist to be at least noninferior in efficacy to VKA for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with AF. This review focuses on current advances in the development of directly acting oral anticoagulant drugs and their potential to replace the VKA class of drugs in patients with AF. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:2067-76) (C) 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available