ABSTRACT
Introducción y objetivos: Los anticoagulantes orales directos (ACOD) se han mostrado eficaces y seguros en pacientes con fibrilación auricular; sin embargo, los pacientes con FA y bioprótesis están infrarrepresentados en los ensayos clínicos, por lo que la evidencia en este grupo es menor. Nuestro objetivo fue analizar la seguridad y eficacia de los ACODs en esta población revisando la información existente en la literatura. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda y revisión sistemática con los ensayos clínicos aleatorizados y estudios observacionales comparativos desde 2017 a enero de 2022, que comparasen ACODs y antagonistas de vitamina K (AVK) en pacientes con FA y bioprótesis. Se utilizó la hazard ratio al 95% del intervalo de confianza para comparar ambos grupos en términos de mortalidad total y cardiovascular, ictus/embolia sistémica y hemorragia mayor. Se realizó un metanálisis combinando los resultados de los estudios incluidos. Resultados: Se incluyeron 12 estudios (un total de 30.283 pacientes). Los ACODs se asociaron a una reducción significativa del 9% de la mortalidad total (HR=0,91; IC95%, 0,85-0,97; p=0,0068; I2=8%), sin diferencias significativas en el riesgo de ictus/embolismo sistémico (HR=0,87; IC95%, 0,67-1,14; p=0,29; I2=45%) o hemorragia mayor (HR=0,82; IC95%, 0,67-1,00; p=0,054; I2=48.7%). Conclusiones: En pacientes con FA portadores de bioprótesis, los ACODs podrían asociarse a una reducción de la mortalidad total sin reducción de eficacia en la prevención de ictus/embolia sistémica o aumento del riesgo de hemorragia mayor.(AU)
Introduction and objectives: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy has been shown to be safe and effective in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, outcomes in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves are unclear, as this population has been underrepresented in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of DOACs in this population based on the existing published literature. Methods: A systematic search and review were conducted to identify randomized clinical trials and comparative observational studies published from 2017 to January 2022 that compared DOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves. Hazard ratios (HR) were collected to compare the 2 treatments in terms of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding. A meta-analysis combining the results was performed. Results: We included 12 studies (30 283 patients). DOACs and VKAs were compared based on HRs at the 95% confidence interval. DOAC therapy was associated with a significant 9% reduction in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.85-0.97; P=.0068; I2=8%), with no significant differences in the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.67-1.14; P=.29; I2=45%) or major bleeding (HR, 0.82; 95%CI, 0.67-1.00; P=.054; I2=48.7%). Conclusions: DOAC therapy in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves may be associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, with no reduction in the efficacy of stroke/systemic embolism prevention or increase in major bleeding risk.(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Atrial Fibrillation , Bioprosthesis , Anticoagulants , CardiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy has been shown to be safe and effective in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, outcomes in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves are unclear, as this population has been underrepresented in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of DOACs in this population based on the existing published literature. METHODS: A systematic search and review were conducted to identify randomized clinical trials and comparative observational studies published from 2017 to January 2022 that compared DOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves. Hazard ratios (HR) were collected to compare the 2 treatments in terms of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding. A meta-analysis combining the results was performed. RESULTS: We included 12 studies (30 283 patients). DOACs and VKAs were compared based on HRs at the 95% confidence interval. DOAC therapy was associated with a significant 9% reduction in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.91; 95%CI, 0.85-0.97; P=.0068; I2=8%), with no significant differences in the risk of stroke/systemic embolism (HR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.67-1.14; P=.29; I2=45%) or major bleeding (HR, 0.82; 95%CI, 0.67-1.00; P=.054; I2=48.7%). CONCLUSIONS: DOAC therapy in AF patients with bioprosthetic valves may be associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, with no reduction in the efficacy of stroke/systemic embolism prevention or increase in major bleeding risk.
