RESUMEN
Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of conventional anticoagulants with new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for management of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST).Methods: This was a retrospective, prospective cohort study of patients who presented with CVST to a tertiary stroke center in the Middle East from January 2012 to October 2019. Patients with a diagnosis of CVST were identified, and data were analyzed for demographic characteristics. Specific consideration was given to compare the efficacy and safety of different anticoagulation treatments.Results: A total of 36 patients were included in the final analysis, with 15 (41%) men and 21 (59%) women and a male to female ratio of 1:1.4. Most of the patients (n = 22, 61%) were Saudi. Their ages ranged between 15 and 82 years (mean ± SD age of 34.22 ± 13.16 years). Headache was the most common feature, present in 22 (61%) of the patients, followed by unilateral weakness in 15 (41%) and cranial nerve palsies in 11 (30%). The most common etiology was prothrombotic state (both hereditary and acquired thrombophilia: n = 16, 45%). Other etiologies were postpartum state/oral contraceptive pill usage in 7 (19%), infections in 7 (19%), and trauma in 3 (8%). Most of the patients (n = 24, 67%) still received conventional anticoagulation (warfarin/low molecular weight heparin), but 9 (25%) of the patients consented to start NOACs. Efficacy (as measured by clinical improvement plus rate of recanalization of previously thrombosed venous sinuses) showed no statistically significant difference, although it proved to be better tolerated, as none of the patients stopped the treatment due to adverse events and risk of major bleeding was significantly low in the NOAC group. Nine patients in the warfarin group stopped medication, while none in the NOAC group did so (P = .034).Conclusion: NOACs were found to be at least as good as conventional anticoagulation for the management of CVST. However, efficacy was almost similar, a finding that is consistent with most of the published case series and the few recently published prospective studies. Larger prospective and population-based studies are needed to clarify our preliminary results.