4.6 Review

Direct oral anticoagulants in treatment of cerebral venous thrombosis: a systematic review

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040212

关键词

stroke; stroke medicine; anticoagulation; epidemiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The systematic review of DOAC therapy in CVT found sufficient safety and efficacy despite variability in timing and dose of treatment. Further rigorous trials are needed to validate these findings and to determine optimal treatment regimens for CVT.
Objectives Current guidelines do not recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to treat cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) despite their benefits over standard therapy. We performed a systematic review to summarise the published experience of DOAC therapy in CVT. Data sources MEDLINE, Embase and COCHRANE databases up to 18 November 2020. Eligibility criteria All published articles of patients with CVT treated with DOAC were included. Studies without follow-up information were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers screened articles and extracted data. A risk of bias analysis was performed. Primary and secondary outcome measures Safety data included mortality, intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) or other adverse events. Efficacy data included recurrent CVT, recanalisation rates and disability by modified Rankin Scales (mRS). Results 33 studies met inclusion criteria. One randomised controlled trial, 5 observational cohorts and 27 case series or studies reported 279 patients treated with DOAC for CVT: 41% dabigatran, 47% rivaroxaban, 10% apixaban and 2% edoxaban, in addition to 315 patients treated with standard therapy. The observational cohorts showed a similar risk of death in DOAC and standard therapy arms (RR 2.12, 95% CI 0.29 to 15.59). New ICH was reported in 2 (0.7%) DOAC-treated patients and recurrent CVT occurred in 4 (1.5%). A favourable mRS between 0 and 2 was reported in 94% of DOAC-treated patients, more likely than standard therapy in observational cohorts (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25). Conclusion The evidence for DOAC use in CVT is limited although suggests sufficient safety and efficacy despite variability in timing and dose of treatment. This systematic review highlights that further rigorous trials are needed to validate these findings and to determine optimal treatment regimens.

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

4.6
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