4.6 Article

Mortality outcomes in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS
卷 13, 期 11, 页码 2012-2020

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1111/jth.13139

关键词

anticoagulants; hemorrhage; mortality; thromboembolism; warfarin

资金

  1. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
  2. Leo Pharma Chair in Thromboembolism Research at McMaster University
  3. Leo Pharma
  4. Bayer
  5. Celgene
  6. Shire
  7. CSL Behring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used as an alternative for warfarin. However, the impact of DOACs on mortality outcomes compared with warfarin remains unclear. Objective: To estimate the mortality outcomes in patients treated with DOACs vs. warfarin (or another vitamin K antagonist). Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases (inception to September 2014), conference abstracts and , were searched, without language restriction. Studies were selected if there were phase III, randomized trials comparing DOACs with warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism. Results: Thirteen randomized controlled trials involving 102 707 adult patients were included in the analysis. The case-fatality rate of major bleeding was 7.57% (95% CI, 6.53-8.68; I-2 = 0%) in patients taking DOACs and 11.04% (95% CI, 9.16-13.07; I-2 = 33.3%) in patients taking warfarin. The rate of fatal bleeding in adult patients receiving DOACs was 0.16 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 0.12-0.20; I-2 = 36.5%). When compared with warfarin, DOACs were associated with significant reductions in fatal bleeding (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43-0.64; I-2 = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94; I-2 = 0%) and all-cause mortality (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96; I-2 = 0%). Conclusions: The use of DOACs compared with warfarin is associated with a lower rate of fatal bleeding, case-fatality rate of major bleeding, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality.

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