4.7 Article

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation Patients

期刊

STROKE
卷 52, 期 4, 页码 1225-1233

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.031007

关键词

anticoagulants; apixaban; atrial fibrillation; propensity score; safety

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81770392, 81770394, 81700344, 81800344, 81800345]
  2. Young Teachers' Basic Scientific Research Business Expenses Project [20ykpy72]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020M673016]
  4. China National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talents [BX20200400]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness and safety of different non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation patients, suggesting that apixaban might be a better choice for stroke prevention.
Background and Purpose: Several observational studies have compared the effect of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants to each other in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, confounding by indication is a major problem when comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant treatments in some of these studies. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant by only including the propensity score matching studies. Methods: We systematically searched the PubMed and Ovid databases until May 2020 to identify relevant observational studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of the reported outcomes were collected and then pooled by a random-effects model complemented with an inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model. Results: A total of 17 retrospective cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with dabigatran use, the use of rivaroxaban was significantly associated with increased risks of stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.05-1.29]) and major bleeding (HR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.24-1.41]), whereas the use of apixaban was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.90]) but not stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.56-1.28]). Compared with rivaroxaban use, the use of apixaban was associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.54-0.73]) but not stroke or systemic embolism (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.67-1.04]). Reanalyses with the inverse variance heterogeneity or quality effects model produced similar results as the random-effects model. Conclusions: Current observational comparisons with propensity score matching methods suggest that apixaban might be a better choice compared with dabigatran or rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据