We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
Ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke associated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin use in patients with atrial fibrillation: a nationwide cohort study.
European Heart Journal 2017 March 22
BACKGROUND: Non-vitamin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are widely used as stroke prophylaxis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), but comparative data are sparse.
PURPOSE: To compare dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban vs. VKA and the risk of stroke/thromboembolism (TE) and intracranial bleeding in AF.
METHODS: Using Danish nationwide registries (2011-15), anticoagulant-naïve AF patients were identified when initiating VKA or an NOAC. Outcomes were stroke/TE and intracranial bleeding. Multiple outcome-specific Cox regression was performed to calculate average treatment effects as standardized differences in 1-year absolute risks.
RESULTS: Overall, 43 299 AF patients initiated VKA (42%), dabigatran (29%), rivaroxaban (13%), and apixaban (16%). Mean CHA2DS2-VASc (SD) score was: VKA 2.9 (1.6), dabigatran 2.7 (1.6), rivaroxaban 3.0 (1.6), and apixaban 3.1 (1.6). Within patient-specific follow-up limited to the first 2 years, 1054 stroke/TE occurred and 261 intracranial bleedings. Standardized absolute risk (95% CI) of stroke/TE at 1 year after initiation of VKA was 2.01% (1.80% to 2.21%). In relation to VKA, the absolute risk differences were for dabigatran 0.11% (-0.16% to 0.42%), rivaroxaban 0.05% (-0.33% to 0.48%), and apixaban 0.45% (-0.001% to 0.93%). For the intracranial bleeding outcome, the standardized absolute risk at 1 year was for VKA 0.60% (0.49% to 0.72%); the corresponding absolute risk differences were for dabigatran -0.34% (-0.47% to - 0.21%), rivaroxaban -0.13% (-0.33% to 0.08%), and apixaban -0.20% (-0.38% to - 0.01%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among anticoagulant-naïve AF patients, treatment with NOACs was not associated with significantly lower risk of stroke/TE compared with VKA, but intracranial bleeding risk was significantly lower with dabigatran and apixaban.
PURPOSE: To compare dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban vs. VKA and the risk of stroke/thromboembolism (TE) and intracranial bleeding in AF.
METHODS: Using Danish nationwide registries (2011-15), anticoagulant-naïve AF patients were identified when initiating VKA or an NOAC. Outcomes were stroke/TE and intracranial bleeding. Multiple outcome-specific Cox regression was performed to calculate average treatment effects as standardized differences in 1-year absolute risks.
RESULTS: Overall, 43 299 AF patients initiated VKA (42%), dabigatran (29%), rivaroxaban (13%), and apixaban (16%). Mean CHA2DS2-VASc (SD) score was: VKA 2.9 (1.6), dabigatran 2.7 (1.6), rivaroxaban 3.0 (1.6), and apixaban 3.1 (1.6). Within patient-specific follow-up limited to the first 2 years, 1054 stroke/TE occurred and 261 intracranial bleedings. Standardized absolute risk (95% CI) of stroke/TE at 1 year after initiation of VKA was 2.01% (1.80% to 2.21%). In relation to VKA, the absolute risk differences were for dabigatran 0.11% (-0.16% to 0.42%), rivaroxaban 0.05% (-0.33% to 0.48%), and apixaban 0.45% (-0.001% to 0.93%). For the intracranial bleeding outcome, the standardized absolute risk at 1 year was for VKA 0.60% (0.49% to 0.72%); the corresponding absolute risk differences were for dabigatran -0.34% (-0.47% to - 0.21%), rivaroxaban -0.13% (-0.33% to 0.08%), and apixaban -0.20% (-0.38% to - 0.01%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among anticoagulant-naïve AF patients, treatment with NOACs was not associated with significantly lower risk of stroke/TE compared with VKA, but intracranial bleeding risk was significantly lower with dabigatran and apixaban.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app