Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(4): 2098-2104, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38576935

ABSTRACT

Background: Cerebral venous thromboembolism (CVT) poses a significant risk of venous infarction and haemorrhage, which can lead to neurological deficits and, in severe cases, even death. The optimal treatment regimen for patients with CVT remains unclear. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Web of Science (WoS), and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with CVT. All-site venous thromboembolism (VTE), risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding, incidence of partial recanalization, complete recanalization and major haemorrhage were among outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. Results: The analysis included 1 RCT and 3 observational studies containing 211 patients. Compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), rivaroxaban did not significantly decrease the all-site VTE [RR 0.31 (95% CI 0.01, 8.43); P=0.49, I2=0%]. Compared with VKAs, patients on rivaroxaban did not show a significantly reduced risk of recurrent cerebral venous thrombosis. In terms of incidence of partial recanalization, there was no discernible difference between rivaroxaban and VKAs [RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.66, 1.22); P=0.49, I2=0%]. There was no discernible difference in incidence of complete recanalization [RR 0.98 (95% CI 0.32, 3.03); P=0.97, I2=28%] and incidence of major haemorrhage [RR 0.19 (95% CI 0.01, 4.54); P=0.30]. Conclusion: Rivaroxaban was found to have similar efficacy to VKAs. Due to its lower risk of severe bleeding and no need for INR monitoring, rivaroxaban may be a preferable treatment option for CVT.

2.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 86(2): 986-993, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38333250

ABSTRACT

Background: Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with diabetes face increased stroke and cardiovascular risks. This study compares factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched for RCTs comparing the risk of efficacy and safety of any factor Xa inhibitors with dose-adjusted warfarin by diabetes status. Incidence of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, all-cause mortality, risk of hemorrhagic stroke, and myocardial infarction were among the outcomes of interest. A generic inverse-weighted random-effects model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs). Results: After applying exclusion criteria, four RCTs containing 19 818 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with warfarin, meta-analysis showed statistically significant reduction in incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.69-0.92]; P=0.002), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.37-0.65]; P<0.001), and risk of hemorrhagic stroke (HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.20-0.66]; P=0.001) in patients on factor Xa inhibitors. However, there was no discernible difference between two treatment arms in incidence of major bleeding (HR 0.93 [95% CI 0.84-1.04]; P=0.19), ischemic stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.90 [95% CI 0.73-1.12; P=0.34), myocardial infarction (RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.67-1.15]; P=0.35), and all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.79-1.01]; P=0.06). Conclusion: Factor Xa inhibitors show a favorable balance between efficacy and safety compared with warfarin, which is consistent across a wide range of patients with atrial fibrillation known to be at high risk for both ischemic and bleeding events.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...