scholarly journals Effectiveness and Tolerability of Anticoagulants for Thromboprophylaxis after Major Joint Surgery: a Network Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 1999-2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Jia Zheng ◽  
Yongqiang Zhao ◽  
Yungai Xiang ◽  
Xiao Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Recombinant Hirudin ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Joint Surgery ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Background/Aims: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common complication after major joint surgery. VTE can easily develop into pulmonary embolism (PE), leading to cardiopulmonary dysfunction or sudden death. We aimed to comprehensively analyse the thromboprophylactic drugs that are used to prevent thrombosis and reduce bleeding risk. Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of thromboprophylaxis after major joint surgery. The major outcomes were the numbers of all-cause VTE and bleeding events, and the secondary outcomes were major VTE and major bleeding/clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. A random-effects network meta-analysis was used to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of each anticoagulant after major joint surgery. Results: We included 104 trials that assessed 110,643 patients in our meta-analysis. The cluster ranking of major outcomes indicated that FXI-ASO, ardeparin, aspirin, and apixaban were ideal for preventing all-cause VTE and avoiding all bleeding events. Nadroparin, recombinant hirudin, and rivaroxaban effectively inhibited VTE but were associated with a high risk of bleeding. For secondary outcomes, we found that betrixaban, dalteparin, warfarin, and eribaxaban were ideal for preventing major VTE and reducing major bleeding, while rivaroxaban effectively inhibited major VTE but was associated with a high risk of major/clinically relevant non-major bleeding. A sensitivity analysis showed that the effect of apixaban was more robust for major outcomes, while aspirin was more robust for preventing all-cause bleeding events. In secondary outcomes, the effect of warfarin was more robust, while apixaban was still considered an ideal treatment to inhibit major VTE and bleeding events. Conclusion: Our study indicates that FXI-ASO, ardeparin, aspirin, and apixaban are ideal for preventing all-cause VTE and reducing all bleeding events, among which apixaban is the most reliable. Betrixaban, dalteparin, warfarin, and eribaxaban are ideal for preventing major VTE and reducing major/clinically relevant non-major bleeding events, among which warfarin is the most reliable.

Racial Differences in Ischaemia/Bleeding Risk Trade-Off during Anti-Platelet Therapy: Individual Patient Level Landmark Meta-Analysis from Seven RCTs

2018 ◽  
Vol 119 (01) ◽  
pp. 149-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeehoon Kang ◽  
Kyung Park ◽  
Tullio Palmerini ◽  
Gregg Stone ◽  
Michael Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
East Asians ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Individual Patient Level ◽  
Patient Level ◽  
Anti Platelet Therapy ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Background Prolonged dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) is intended to reduce ischaemic events, at the cost of an increased bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this study, we evaluated whether race influences the ischaemia/bleeding risk trade-off. Methods We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT duration after PCI. To compare the benefit or harm between DAPT duration by race, individual patient-level landmark meta-analysis was performed after discontinuation of the shorter duration DAPT group in each RCT. The primary ischaemic endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and the primary bleeding endpoint was major bleeding events (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03338335). Results Seven RCTs including 16,518 patients (8,605 East Asians, 7,913 non-East Asians) were pooled. MACE occurred more frequently in non-East Asians (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), while major bleeding events occurred more frequently in East Asians (0.6% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.001). In Cox proportional hazards model, prolonged DAPT significantly increased the risk of major bleeding in East Asians (hazard ratio [HR], 2.843, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.474–5.152, p = 0.002), but not in non-East Asians (HR, 1.375, 95% CI, 0.523–3.616, p = 0.523). East Asians had a higher median probability risk ratio of bleeding to ischaemia (0.66 vs. 0.15), and the proportion of patients with higher probability of bleeding than ischaemia was significantly higher in East Asians (32.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001). Conclusion We suggest that the ischaemia/bleeding trade-off may be different between East Asians and non-East Asians. In East Asians, prolonged DAPT may have no effect in reducing the ischaemic risk, while significantly increases the bleeding risk.

scholarly journals Comparison of Major Bleeding Events of Uninterrupted Novel Oral Anticoagulants Versus Uninterrupted Vitamin K Antagonist During Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qian Yang ◽  
Xuefeng Chen ◽  
Jianlong Zhai ◽  
Yi Dang
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonist ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Puncture Site ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Effect Model ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract Background: Previous meta-analyses comparing efficacy and safety of uninterrupted novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus uninterrupted vitamin K antagonist (VKA) during catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) had no consensus in major bleeding, and didn’t perform subgroup analyses for different types of major bleeding events. This meta-analysis was performed to comprehensively evaluate the risk of major bleeding events of these two anticoagulant strategies during CA of AF.Methods: We searched online databases for randomized controlled trials that compared major bleeding events of uninterrupted NOACs and VKA during CA of AF up to January 2021. A fixed-effect model was used if the chi-squared test P-value was > 0.10 and I2 was < 50%, otherwise a random- effect model was used.Results: Six published studies including 2392 patients were identified for inclusion in the analysis. The overall incidence of major bleeding events was lower in the NOACs group than in the VKA group (OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.34 – 0.93, I2 = 38%, P = 0.15). Subgroup analyses showed that the incidence of severe puncture site complications was lower in the NOACs group than in the VKA group (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.30 – 0.96, I2 = 16%, P = 0.32). But the incidence of cardiac tamponade (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.23 – 1.26, I2 = 0%, P = 0.46), intracranial (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.03 – 2.23, I2 = 0%, P = 0.82) and gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.18 – 5.39, I2 = 0%, P = 0.43) had no statistically significant differences between the two groups.Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that compared to uninterrupted VKA, uninterrupted NOACs are superior in major bleeding and severe puncture site complications during CA of AF, but are not superior in cardiac tamponade, intracranial and gastrointestinal bleeding.

scholarly journals Intermediate-to-therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for coagulopathy in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a systemic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirui Zhang ◽  
Yupei Li ◽  
Guina Liu ◽  
Baihai Su
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Risk Of Bleeding ◽  
Therapeutic Anticoagulation ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Prophylactic Anticoagulation

Abstract Background Anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been associated with survival benefit; however, the optimal anticoagulant strategy has not yet been defined. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of intermediate-to-therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis on the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality and other patient-centered secondary outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to August 10th 2021. Cohort studies and randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of intermediate-to-therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients were included. Baseline characteristics and relevant data of each study were extracted in a pre-designed standardized data-collection form. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcomes were incidence of thrombotic events and incidence of any bleeding and major bleeding. Pooled analysis with random effects models yielded relative risk with 95 % CIs. Results This meta-analysis included 42 studies with 28,055 in-hospital COVID-19 patients totally. Our pooled analysis demonstrated that intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality (RR=1.12, 95 %CI 0.99-1.25, p=0.06, I2=77 %) and lower incidence of thrombotic events (RR=1.30, 95 %CI 0.79-2.15, p=0.30, I2=88 %), but increased the risk of any bleeding events (RR=2.16, 95 %CI 1.79-2.60, p<0.01, I2=31 %) and major bleeding events significantly (RR=2.10, 95 %CI 1.77-2.51, p<0.01, I2=11 %) versus prophylactic anticoagulation. Moreover, intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation decreased the incidence of thrombotic events (RR=0.71, 95 %CI 0.56-0.89, p=0.003, I2=0 %) among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU), with increased bleeding risk (RR=1.66, 95 %CI 1.37-2.00, p<0.01, I2=0 %) and unchanged in-hospital mortality (RR=0.94, 95 %CI 0.79-1.10, p=0.42, I2=30 %) in such patients. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. Conclusions We recommend the use of prophylactic anticoagulation against intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation among unselected hospitalized COVID-19 patients considering insignificant survival benefits but higher risk of bleeding in the escalated thromboprophylaxis strategy. For critically ill COVID-19 patients, the benefits of intermediate-to-therapeutic anticoagulation in reducing thrombotic events should be weighed cautiously because of its association with higher risk of bleeding. Trial registration The protocol was registered at PROSPERO on August 17th 2021 (CRD42021273780). Graphical abstract

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Long‐Term Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Network Meta‐analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Houyong Zhu ◽  
Xiaoqun Xu ◽  
Xiaojiang Fang ◽  
Fei Ying ◽  
Liuguang Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
High Risk Factors ◽  
Cerebrovascular Events

Background Long‐term antithrombotic strategies for patients with chronic coronary syndrome with high‐risk factors represent an important treatment dilemma in clinical practice. Our aim was to conduct a network meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long‐term antithrombotic strategies in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Methods and Results Four randomized studies were included (n=75167; THEMIS [Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in Diabetes Mellitus Patients Intervention Study], COMPASS [Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies], PEGASUS‐TIMI 54 [Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 54], and DAPT [Dual Anti‐platelet Therapy]). The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs) were calculated as the measure of effect size. The results of the network meta‐analysis showed that, compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial‐defined major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were 0.86; (95% CI, 0.80–0.93) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78–1.02) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.64–0.85) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.60,–0.86) for thienopyridine plus aspirin. Compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial‐defined major bleeding were 2.15 (95% CI, 1.78–2.59]) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 1.51 (95% CI, 1.23–1.85) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, and 1.68 (95% CI, 1.37–2.05) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin. For death from any cause, the improvement effect of rivaroxaban plus aspirin was detected versus aspirin monotherapy (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65–0.90), ticagrelor plus aspirin (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66–0.95), rivaroxaban monotherapy (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69–0.97), and thienopyridine plus aspirin (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41–0.82) regimens. Conclusions All antithrombotic strategies combined with aspirin significantly reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and increased the risk of major bleeding compared with aspirin monotherapy. Considering the outcomes of all ischemic and bleeding events and all‐cause mortality, rivaroxaban plus aspirin appears to be the preferred long‐term antithrombotic regimen for patients with chronic coronary syndrome and high‐risk factors.

scholarly journals Risk of major bleeding during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Faizan Khan ◽  
Miriam Kimpton ◽  
Tobias Tritschler ◽  
Grégoire Le Gal ◽  
Brian Hutton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract Background The optimal duration of anticoagulation after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains controversial. Deciding to stop or continue anticoagulant therapy indefinitely after completing 3 to 6 months of initial treatment requires balancing the long-term risk of recurrent VTE if anticoagulation is stopped against the long-term risk of major bleeding if anticoagulation is continued. However, knowledge of the long-term risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation in this patient population is limited. We plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the risk for major bleeding events during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE. Methods Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be systematically searched with the assistance of an information specialist (from inception to March 1, 2019) to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies reporting major bleeding during extended oral anticoagulation in patients with first unprovoked VTE, who have completed at least 3 months of initial anticoagulant therapy. Study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction will be performed independently by at least two investigators. The number of major bleeding events and person-years of follow-up will be used to calculate the rate (events per 100 person-years) with its 95% confidence interval for each study cohort, during clinically relevant time periods of extended anticoagulant therapy. Results will be pooled using random effect meta-analysis. Discussion The planned systematic review and meta-analysis will provide reliable estimates of the risk for major bleeding events during extended anticoagulation. This information will help inform patient prognosis and assist clinicians with balancing the risks and benefits of treatment to guide management of unprovoked VTE. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019128597.

P4742Evaluation of the HAS-BLED, ATRIA and ORBIT bleeding risk scores in newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Bergamaschi ◽  
A Stefanizzi ◽  
M Coriano ◽  
P Paolisso ◽  
I Magnani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Hemorrhagic Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract Background Several risk scores have been proposed to assess the bleeding risk in patients with Atrial Fibrillation. Purpose To compare the efficacy of HAS-BLED, ATRIA and ORBIT scores to predict major bleedings in newly diagnosed non-valvular AF (NV-AF) treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or new oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Methods We analyzed all consecutive patients with AF at our outpatient clinic from January to December 2017. Only those with new diagnosed NV-AF starting new anticoagulant therapy were enrolled. Major hemorrhagic events were defined according to the ISTH definition in non-surgical patients. Results Out of the 820 patients admitted with AF, 305 were newly diagnosed with NV-AF starting oral anticoagulation. Overall, 51.3% were male with a mean age of 72.6±13.7 years. Thirty-six patients (11.8%) started VKAs whereas 269 (88.2%) patients were treated with NOACs. The median follow-up time was 10.4±3.4 months. During follow-up, 123 (32.2%) bleeding events were recorded, 21 (17,1%) in the VKA group and 102 (82,9%) in the NOAC group. Eleven (2.9%) major bleeding events occurred: 5 (45.5%) in the VKA group and 6 (54.5%) in the NOAC group. Overall, patients with major hemorrhagic events showed a mean value of the scores significantly higher when compared to patients without such bleeding complications (HASBLED 3.4 vs 2.4 p=0.007; ATRIA 5.6 vs 2.4 p<0.001; ORBIT 3.6 vs 1.8 p<0,001). Conversely, when analyzing the VKA subgroup, only the ATRIA score was significantly higher in patients with major adverse events (7.4 vs 3.5 p<0.001; HAS-BLED: 4.4 vs 3.6 p=0.27; ORBIT 4.4 vs 2.9 p=0.13). An ATRIA score ≥4 identified patients at high risk of bleeding (29.4% vs. 0% events. respectively, p=0.04). In the NOAC group, patients with major bleeding events had higher mean values of ATRIA (4.0 vs 2.3 p=0.02) and ORBIT (2.8 vs 1.6 p=0,04) but not the HAS-BLED (2.5 vs 2.3 p=0.57) scores. Similarly, patients on NOACs with an ATRIA score ≥4 had higher rates of major bleedings (8.1% vs. 1.6% p=0,02). Comparing the single elements of the ATRIA score, only glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min/1.73 mq was associated with major bleedings in the VKA group (p<0.001) whereas, in the NOAC group, anemia was strongly associated with bleeding events (p=0,02). In fact, multivariate analysis in the NOAC group showed that hemoglobin level at admission was an independent predictor for major bleeding events (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.75, P=0.003). Conversely, in the VKA group, baseline creatinine level was an independent predictor for these events (OR 12.76, 95% CI 1.6–101.7, P=0.016). Conclusions The ATRIA score showed the best efficacy in predicting major bleeding events. Hemoglobin and creatinine levels at admission were independent predictors for major hemorrhagic events in the NOAC and in the VKA groups, respectively. The latter finding might be helpful in stratifying the hemorrhagic risk at the beginning of treatment.

Primary Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients with Solid Tumors Receiving Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1157-1157
Author(s):  
Minh Phan ◽  
Sonia John ◽  
Ana Isabel Casanegra ◽  
Alfonso Tafur
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mortality Data ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Vte Prophylaxis ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis

Abstract Abstract 1157 Background: Venous thromboembolism [VTE] is the second highest cause of mortality among patients with cancer. However, pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for patients with solid tumor is only recommended during hospitalization. Primary outpatient thromboprophylaxis is not a widely accepted practice. Objective: Determine safety and efficacy of outpatient primary VTE prophylaxis in patients with solid tumors. Data sources: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE up to June 2012. Key search words included venous thromboembolism, malignancy, anticoagulants, and chemotherapy. Studies were considered for our meta-analysis if they included outpatient primary pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in adult patients with active solid cancer. All the information was independently reviewed by 2 of the authors [MP, SJ] and a third reviewer resolved discrepancies. The measure of association was calculated with R (R: A Language and Environment for Statistical, R Development Core Team, www.R-project.org), R META package (Version 0.8–2, Author: Guido Schwarzer). The Q statistic was calculated and a formal test of homogeneity was conducted. Random-effects model was preferred in case of heterogeneity. Results: A total of 1371 abstracts were reviewed and 29 manuscripts were fully abstracted. Eight randomized controlled trials including 6706 patients were analyzed. There were less VTE events with outpatient prophylaxis: odds ratio [OR] of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.40–0.70). Six studies used low or ultra-low molecular weight heparin and two studies used warfarin. In the subgroup analysis of heparin based primary prophylaxis, there was a significant reduction in VTE events [OR 0.47, 95% CI, 0.34–0.64], no significant heterogeneity [FIG 1]. In addition, there was no difference in major bleeding events between groups [OR 1.48, 95% CI, 0.89–2.46]. Five studies reported mortality data; there was significant heterogeneity between studies. Conclusions: Heparin based outpatient VTE prophylaxis in patients with solid tumors reduced by half the risk of VTE with no significant differences in major bleeding events. The current publications do not allow a meaningful grouped analysis of survival data, improved patient selection is necessary in order to adequately target VTE prevention strategies. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Clinical impact of CREDO-kyoto risk score on in-hospital bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Minematsu ◽  
M Natsuaki ◽  
G Yoshioka ◽  
K Shinzato ◽  
Y Nishimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Severe Bleeding ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Coronary Syndrome

Abstract Background/Introduction CREDO-Kyoto bleeding risk score was developed to predict the post-discharge bleeding events in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention. However, there were limited reports of the effectiveness of this score to predict the in-hospital bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods We evaluated 562 consecutive ACS patients in Saga university hospital between 2014 and 2019. Primary outcome was major bleeding during hospitalization. Major bleeding was defined as the GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding. Patients were classified into three groups according to the CREDO-Kyoto bleeding risk score (low, intermediate and high). Results Major bleeding events occurred in 12.1% of all patients during hospitalization. Patients in the high risk group (n=22) had significantly higher incidence of major bleeding than those in the intermediate (n=113) and the low risk groups (n=427) (22.7%, 18.6%, versus 9.8%, respectively, p=0.018, see figure). Multivariate analysis showed that intermediate and high risk groups were independent predictors for the in-hospital major bleeding. Conclusions CREDO-Kyoto risk score successfully identified high risk ACS patients for the major bleeding during hospitalization. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Results

scholarly journals Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1238-1238
Author(s):  
Kamolyut Lapumnuaypol ◽  
Thita Chiasakul
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Low Molecular Weight Heparin ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cirrhotic Patients

Abstract Introduction: The coagulopathy of cirrhosis is characterized by a complex rebalanced hemostasis which increases the risk of bleeding as well as thrombosis. For the treatment and prevention of thromboembolism, low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and vitamin K antagonists, such as warfarin, are generally used in cirrhotic patients. Although efficacious, these agents are inconvenient due to the parenteral route of administration, need for monitoring, and interactions with food or drugs. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may provide safe and effective alternatives for patients with cirrhosis. However, data concerning their safety profile in this population are limited given that patients with advanced liver diseases were excluded from most clinical trials. To address this, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of DOACs compared to warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in patients with cirrhosis. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception up to June 2018. We included prospective and retrospective studies involving adults ≥18 years with cirrhosis of any stage in whom anticoagulants were indicated for any indications. Included studies are required to report the incidence, odds ratio, or hazard ratio of bleeding events in both patients receiving DOACs and patients receiving warfarin or LMWH (controls). Two authors independently searched the literature, screened for eligibility, and extracted the data. Any discrepancies were resolved by reaching consensus. Primary outcome of interest was all-cause bleeding events. Secondary outcome was major bleeding. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. For all-cause bleeding, pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Mantel-Haenszel method. For major bleeding, effect estimates and standard errors from individual studies were combined by the generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. Random-effects model was used in all analyses. Inter-study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and I2statistics. Results: A total of 279 articles were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE, of which 93 were removed because of duplication. After screening by title and abstract, 174 articles were excluded. Full text of 12 articles were reviewed, of which 5 studies (4 observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial) with a total of 447 patients met eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. The indications for anticoagulants included atrial fibrillation, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and portal vein thrombosis. The DOACs used in these studies included dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban. Heterogeneity among studies was low to moderate. Compared to controls, the use of DOACs in cirrhotic patients did not show any significant difference in all-cause bleeding (RR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.32-1.63; I2=59%, Figure 1). Among 3 studies that reported major bleeding, there was no significant difference in major bleeding between both groups (OR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.10-2.09; I2=42%, Figure 2). Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that, compared to those who were treated with traditional anticoagulants, cirrhotic patients who were treated with DOACs had no significant increase risk of all-cause bleeding and major bleeding. The use of DOACs in patents with cirrhosis appears to be as safe as traditional anticoagulants. Further randomized controlled studies involving larger numbers of patients are required to explore the efficacy as well as potential beneficial effects of DOACs for each indications in cirrhotic patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document