Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

22 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of left ventricular (LV) thrombus has gained considerable interest.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate if DOACs are effective in the treatment of LV thrombus compared with warfarin.

Methods

We evaluated the medical records of patients diagnosed with a new LV thrombus at a tertiary medical center. The primary outcome was the composite of thrombus persistence, stroke, or systemic embolism. We adjusted for potential confounders using multiple logistic regression. The safety outcome was the composite of hemorrhagic stroke or bleeding requiring blood transfusion.

Results

A total of 129 patients were treated with warfarin and 22, with a DOAC. In unadjusted analysis, 54.3% of patients treated with warfarin met criteria for the efficacy outcome as compared with 40.9% of patients treated with a DOAC (P = 0.25). In adjusted analysis, no difference between groups was observed (odds ratio = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.14-1.06; P = 0.07 for DOAC vs warfarin). In all, 3.9% of patients treated with warfarin met safety criteria as compared with 4.5% of patients treated with a DOAC. A total of 8 patients in the warfarin group had a stroke or systemic embolism as compared with 0 patients in the DOAC group (P = 0.37).

Conclusion and relevance

Our data suggest that DOACs may be reasonable alternatives for treatment of LV thrombus. When added to the totality of available studies, this study demonstrates that the effectiveness of DOACs in LV thrombus remains uncertain. Randomized clinical trials are needed.

SUBMITTER: Willeford A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8842988 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Warfarin versus direct oral anticoagulants for treating left ventricular thrombus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Project description:BackgroundLeft ventricular thrombus (LVT) is not uncommon and pose a risk of systemic embolism, which can be mitigated by adequate anticoagulation. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly being used as alternatives to warfarin for anticoagulation, but their efficacy and safety profile has been debated. We aim to compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of DOACs versus warfarin for the treatment of LVT.MethodologyWe systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, and LILCAS databases from inception to 14th August 2020 to identify relevant studies comparing warfarin and DOACs for LVT treatment and used the pooled data extracted from retrieved studies to perform a meta-analysis.ResultsWe report pooled data on 1955 patients from 8 studies, with a mean age of 61 years and 59.7 years in warfarin and DOACs group, respectively. The pooled odds ratio for thrombus resolution was 1.11 (95% CI 0.51-2.39) on comparing warfarin to DOAC, but it did not reach a statistical significance (p = 0.76). The pooled risk ratio (RR) of stroke or systemic embolization and bleeding in patients treated with warfarin vs DOACs was 1.04 (95% CI 0.64-1.68; p = 0.85), and 1.15 (95% CI 0.62-2.13; p = 0.57), respectively; with an overall RR of 1.09 (95% CI 0.70-1.70; p = 0.48) for mortality.ConclusionsDOACs appears to be non-inferior or at least as effective as warfarin in the treatment of left ventricular thrombus without any statistical difference in stroke or bleeding complications.

| S-EPMC7849079 | biostudies-literature

Meta-analysis comparing direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with left ventricular thrombus.

Project description:Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for stroke or ST-elevation myocardial infarction recommend the use of oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as a first-line anticoagulant. Although several studies have compared the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to VKAs for left ventricular thrombus (LVT) anticoagulation therapy, they are small scale and have produced conflicting results. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to aggregate these studies to better compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs with VKAs in patients with LVT. Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and Web of Science database searches through January 10, 2021 were performed. Eight studies evaluating stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), six studies for LVT resolution, and five studies for bleeding were included. There were no statistically significant differences in SSE (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.46, 1.71; p = 0.73; I2 = 45%) and LVT resolution (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.75, 1.71; p = 0.56; I2 = 1%) between DOAC and VKA (reference group) therapy. DOAC use was significantly associated with lower bleeding event rates compared to VKA use (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.40, 0.93; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%). DOACs may be feasible alternative anticoagulants to vitamin K antagonists for LV thrombus treatment. Randomized controlled trials directly comparing DOACs with VKAs are needed.

| S-EPMC8177531 | biostudies-literature

Off-label Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared With Warfarin for Left Ventricular Thrombi.

Project description:ImportanceLeft ventricular (LV) thrombi can arise in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathies. Anticoagulation is thought to reduce the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), but there are no high-quality data on the effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for this indication.ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes associated with DOAC use and warfarin use for the treatment of LV thrombi.Design, setting, and participantsA cohort study was performed at 3 tertiary care academic medical centers among 514 eligible patients with echocardiographically diagnosed LV thrombi between October 1, 2013, and March 31, 2019. Follow-up was performed through the end of the study period.ExposuresType and duration of anticoagulant use.Main outcomes and measuresClinically apparent SSE.ResultsA total of 514 patients (379 men; mean [SD] age, 58.4 [14.8] years) with LV thrombi were identified, including 300 who received warfarin and 185 who received a DOAC (64 patients switched treatment between these groups). The median follow-up across the patient cohort was 351 days (interquartile range, 51-866 days). On unadjusted analysis, DOAC treatment vs warfarin use (hazard ratio [HR], 2.71; 95% CI, 1.31-5.57; P = .01) and prior SSE (HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.22-3.72; P = .01) were associated with SSE. On multivariable analysis, anticoagulation with DOAC vs warfarin (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.28-5.43; P = .01) and prior SSE (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.17-3.66; P = .01) remained significantly associated with SSE.Conclusions and relevanceIn this multicenter cohort study of anticoagulation strategies for LV thrombi, DOAC treatment was associated with a higher risk of SSE compared with warfarin use, even after adjustment for other factors. These results challenge the assumption of DOAC equivalence with warfarin for LV thrombi and highlight the need for prospective randomized clinical trials to determine the most effective treatment strategies for LV thrombi.

| S-EPMC7177639 | biostudies-literature

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials.

Project description:AbstractLeft ventricular thrombi (LVTs) increase the risk of stroke, systemic embolism, and subsequent death. Current guidelines recommend vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as first-line treatment for LVT. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used as alternatives to warfarin for the treatment of LVT. However, the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus VKAs remain controversial. Thus, we conducted an updated meta-analysis of DOACs versus VKAs for LVT treatment. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant articles published before December 11, 2021. The relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each study. The meta-analysis included 12 cohort studies and 3 randomized controlled trials with a total of 2334 patients. We found that DOACs had a lower risk of clinically significant bleeding than VKAs (RR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.90; P = 0.01; I2 = 0%). There was no difference in LVT resolution (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.09; P = 0.48; I2 = 0%), stroke and/or systematic embolic events (RR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.11 to 1.55; P = 0.2; I2 = 30%), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.9; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.4; P = 0.65; I2 = 0%). Overall, DOACs are noninferior to warfarin in LVT treatment but have a lower risk of clinically significant bleeding. This suggests that DOACs might be better alternatives to warfarin for LVT treatment.

| S-EPMC9162267 | biostudies-literature

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Form Thrombus Different From Warfarin in a Microchip Flow Chamber System.

Project description:Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have low risk of intracranial hemorrhage compared to warfarin. We sought to clarify the different mechanisms responsible for suppression of bleeding events using the Total Thrombus-formation Analysis System (T-TAS), a flow-microchip chamber with thrombogenic surfaces. Blood samples were obtained at Off- and On-anticoagulant (trough) from 120 consecutive patients with atrial fibrillation (warfarin; n = 29, dabigatran; n = 19, rivaroxaban; n = 47, apixaban; n = 25), which were used for T-TAS to compute the area under the curve (AUC) (AR10-AUC30) in the AR chip, and to measure plasma concentrations of DOACs at On-anticoagulant. In addition, the two-dimensional area covered by thrombi (%) in the capillary was analyzed every 3 minutes after sample applications. The AR10-AUC30 correlated weakly and negatively with plasma concentrations of DOACs, and the levels at On-anticoagulant were lower in all groups than at Off-anticoagulant. AR10-AUC30 levels at Off- and On-anticoagulant were identical among the groups. The thrombi areas in early phase were significantly larger in rivaroxaban and apixaban than warfarin and dabigatran groups. The findings suggested that visual analysis of the AR-chip can identify the differential inhibitory patterns of warfarin and DOACs on thrombus formation under flow condition.

| S-EPMC5547037 | biostudies-other

Therapeutic efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists for left ventricular thrombus: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough several meta-analyses have compared efficacies of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for treatment of left ventricular thrombus (LVT), those meta-analyses included no single-arm studies.Methods and resultsPubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles investigating thrombus resolution, stroke, any thromboembolism, major bleeding, any bleeding, or all-cause death in LVT treated with VKAs or DOACs, and single-class meta-analyses were also included (PROSPERO database, CRD42021230849). Event rates were pooled using a random effects model. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore factors that may influence outcomes. 2,612 patients from 23 articles were included (VKAs: 2,004, DOACs: 608). There were no significant differences between VKAs and DOACs in the frequency of thrombus resolution (VKAs: 0.75 [95% confidence interval; 0.67 to 0.81], DOACs: 0.75 [0.67 to 0.82]), stroke (VKAs: 0.06 [0.04 to 0.10], DOACs: 0.02 [0.01 to 0.01]), any thromboembolism (VKAs: 0.08 [0.05 to 0.13], DOACs: 0.03 [0.01 to 0.10]), major bleeding (VKAs: 0.06 [0.04 to 0.09], DOACs: 0.03 [0.01 to 0.06]), any bleeding (VKAs: 0.08 [0.05 to 0.12], DOACs: 0.08 [0.06 to 0.10]), and all-cause death (VKAs: 0.07 [0.04 to 0.13], DOACs: 0.09 [0.05 to 0.16]). Meta-regression analysis revealed that increased duration of follow-up was associated with lower-rates of stroke (estimate: -0.040, p = 0.0495) with VKAs, but not with DOACs. There was significant publication bias for thrombus resolution, stroke, any thromboembolism, any bleeding, and all-cause death.ConclusionsEfficacy and adverse outcomes of therapy with DOACs and VKAs do not differ. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal anticoagulant strategy.

| S-EPMC8312978 | biostudies-literature

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin: is new always better than the old?

Project description:About 1.4 British million people are at risk of strokes due to non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) necessitating long-term anticoagulation. The vitamin K antagonist, warfarin, has a long half-life and narrow therapeutic range necessitating regular monitoring and is a common cause of iatrogenic hospital admission. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban are not required to have monitoring but are sensitive to changes in renal function and are associated with poorer adherence. There are good grounds to believe that DOACs are not always superior to warfarin in routine practice particularly with an older population. Much higher levels of therapeutic effectiveness can be achieved using a simple genotype guidance to identify those who are highly sensitive and by adoption of home monitoring. These adjustments could make warfarin the preferred drug for most people and would reduce the dramatic rise in health service expenditure.

| S-EPMC5845414 | biostudies-literature

Assessment of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants for the management of left ventricular thrombus.

Project description:Although several studies have assessed the effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) relative to that of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with left ventricular thrombus, the results remain controversial. Herein, a meta-analysis was performed to compare the effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus VKAs for the treatment of left ventricular thrombus. We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Embase databases until November 2020 for studies that compared the effects of NOACs versus VKAs in patients with left ventricular thrombus. The treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and pooled by a random-effects model. Seven retrospective studies involving 865 patients with left ventricular thrombus (266 NOAC and 599 VKA users) were included. The pooled analysis suggested no difference in the rate of thrombus resolution between the NOAC and VKA groups (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.61-1.13). There were also no differences in the rates of stroke or systemic embolism (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.20-1.97), bleeding events (OR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.37-1.45), or all-cause death (OR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.50-1.69) between patients treated with NOACs and those treated with VKAs. In addition, the rates of thrombus resolution, stroke or systemic embolism, bleeding events, and all-cause death between NOAC- and warfarin-treated patients were also similar. Our current evidence suggested that NOAC and VKA users had similar rates of thrombus resolution and clinical outcomes among patients with left ventricular thrombus. Further large-scale prospective studies should confirm our results.

| S-EPMC8207971 | biostudies-literature

Anticoagulant treatment satisfaction with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism.

Project description:Treatment options for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) include warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Although DOACs are easier to administer than warfarin and do not require routine laboratory monitoring, few studies have directly assessed whether patients are more satisfied with DOACs. We surveyed adults from two large integrated health systems taking DOACs or warfarin for incident VTE occurring between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the validated Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS), divided into the ACTS Burdens and ACTS Benefits scores; higher scores indicate greater satisfaction. Mean treatment satisfaction was compared using multivariable linear regression, adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. The effect size of the difference in means was calculated using a Cohen's d (0.20 is considered a small effect and ≥ 0.80 is considered large). We surveyed 2217 patients, 969 taking DOACs and 1248 taking warfarin at the time of survey. Thirty-one point five percent of the cohort was aged ≥ 75 years and 43.1% were women. DOAC users were on average more satisfied with anticoagulant treatment, with higher adjusted mean ACTS Burdens (50.18 v. 48.01, p < 0.0001) and ACTS Benefits scores (10.21 v. 9.84, p = 0.046) for DOACs vs. warfarin, respectively. The magnitude of the difference was small (Cohen's d of 0.29 for ACTS Burdens and 0.12 for ACTS Benefits). Patients taking DOACs for venous thromboembolism were on average more satisfied with anticoagulant treatment than were warfarin users, although the magnitude of the difference was small.

| S-EPMC8605968 | biostudies-literature

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin Following WATCHMAN in High-Risk Patients.

Project description:BackgroundIn the pivotal WATCHMAN trials, warfarin was used exclusively for postprocedural anticoagulation following left atrial appendage closure. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent left atrial appendage closure with WATCHMAN.MethodsThis was a retrospective study of 318 patients who underwent the WATCHMAN procedure in a tertiary referral center (June 2016-September 2020). We compared the outcomes of patients who were discharged on DOACs versus warfarin after the WATCHMAN procedure. The primary outcome was the composite of any bleeding, thromboembolism, or cardiovascular death through 7 days and 45 days after the procedure.ResultsThe final analysis included 301 patients, of whom 82.4% (248/301) were discharged on DOACs and 17.6% (53/301) were discharged on warfarin. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4.9 ± 1.6 and 2.9 ± 0.9, respectively. The primary composite outcome was similar between the DOAC and warfarin groups through 7 days (3.2% vs 5.6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-3.17; P = .59) and 45 days after procedure (10.1% vs 11.3%; adjusted OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.41-3.45; P = .76). Major bleeding (5.2% vs 9.5%; P = .34) and all-cause readmission (12.5% vs 16.9%; P = .85) at 45 days were comparable between the DOAC and warfarin groups. The overall incidence of device-related thrombus and significant peri-device flow at 45 days were low (<0.5%).ConclusionsIn high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation, the primary composite outcome of any bleeding, thromboembolism, or cardiovascular death through 7 days and 45 days following WATCHMAN implantation was similar in patients receiving DOACs versus warfarin.

| S-EPMC11307383 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data