4.7 Review

New Insights into the Pros and Cons of the Clinical Use of Vitamin K Antagonists (VKAs) Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs)

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 7, Issue 11, Pages 9538-9557

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu7115479

Keywords

oral anticoagulants; vitamin K; vascular calcification; coumarin; DOACs

Funding

  1. Trombose Stichting Nederland [2014.02]
  2. Norwegian Research Council
  3. NattoPharma ASA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vitamin K-antagonists (VKA) are the most widely used anticoagulant drugs to treat patients at risk of arterial and venous thrombosis for the past 50 years. Due to unfavorable pharmacokinetics VKA have a small therapeutic window, require frequent monitoring, and are susceptible to drug and nutritional interactions. Additionally, the effect of VKA is not limited to coagulation, but affects all vitamin K-dependent proteins. As a consequence, VKA have detrimental side effects by enhancing medial and intimal calcification. These limitations stimulated the development of alternative anticoagulant drugs, resulting in direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) drugs, which specifically target coagulation factor Xa and thrombin. DOACs also display non-hemostatic vascular effects via protease-activated receptors (PARs). As atherosclerosis is characterized by a hypercoagulable state indicating the involvement of activated coagulation factors in the genesis of atherosclerosis, anticoagulation could have beneficial effects on atherosclerosis. Additionally, accumulating evidence demonstrates vascular benefit from high vitamin K intake. This review gives an update on oral anticoagulant treatment on the vasculature with a special focus on calcification and vitamin K interaction.

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