Dataset Information

Direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonist on dementia risk in atrial fibrillation: systematic review with meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Oral anticoagulation significantly reduces the incidence of dementia in atrial fibrillation patients. However, this protective effect has not been compared between Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC) and Vitamin K antagonists' anticoagulants (VKA). We conducted an electronic search for potentially eligible studies through the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE and Web of Science. The outcome of interest was dementia. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Nine observational studies were included and 1,175,609 atrial fibrillation patients were enrolled. DOAC therapy was associated with a significant reduction when compared with patients under VKA therapy (hazard ratio 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.99). The grade of confidence of our results was very low due to the risk of bias. DOAC therapy is associated with a significant decrease in the risk of dementia when compared with VKA therapy. However, the low certainty of the evidence along with the paucityof clinical trials dedicated to answering this important question underscores a need for global clinical research initiatives.

SUBMITTER: Branco DR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10439029 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonist on dementia risk in atrial fibrillation: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Branco Diogo R DR Alves Mariana M Severiano E Sousa Catarina C Costa João J Ferreira Joaquim J JJ Caldeira Daniel D

Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis 20230705 3

Oral anticoagulation significantly reduces the incidence of dementia in atrial fibrillation patients. However, this protective effect has not been compared between Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC) and Vitamin K antagonists' anticoagulants (VKA). We conducted an electronic search for potentially eligible studies through the bibliographic databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE and Web of Science. The outcome of interest was dementia. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Nin ...[more]

PMID: 37405677

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin are usually used for people with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, for the AF patients at risk of falling, the effectiveness and safety outcomes of DOACs compared with warfarin remain unclear. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis regarding the effectiveness and safety of DOACs vs. warfarin in AF patients at risk of falling.MethodsA search of the PubMed and Embase databases until November 2021 was performed. We included studies if they satisfied the following criteria: (1) study type: randomized clinical trials or observational cohort studies. (2) Comparisons: effectiveness and/or safety of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban) compared with warfarin. (3) Study data: the sample size, the number of events in the VKAs or DOACs groups, adjusted risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). (4) Study outcomes: stroke or systemic embolism (SSE), ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause death, and cardiovascular death; major bleeding, major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and any bleeding. (5) Study population: patients at risk of falling. According to the Morse Fall Scale, the risk of falling relates to the history of falling, secondary diagnosis, ambulatory aids, intravenous therapy, type of gait, and mental status. In this meta-analysis, if the patient's MFS score is ≥25 points, he will be thought of as having the risk of falling. The adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by a random-effects model with an inverse variance method.ResultsThree cohort studies were included in our study. For the effectiveness outcomes, the use of DOACs was only associated with a significantly reduced risk of hemorrhagic stroke (RR = 0.28, 95%CI:0.10-0.75) compared with warfarin, but there were no significant differences in stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) (RR = 0.87, 95%CI:0.70-1.08), cardiovascular death (RR = 0.97, 95%CI:0.73-1.29) and all-cause death (RR = 0.90, 95%CI:0.72-1.11). For the safety outcomes, the use of DOACs was significantly associated with reduced risks of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR = 0.77, 95%CI:0.61-0.98) and intracranial bleeding (RR = 0.26, 95%CI:0.11-0.66) but not major bleeding (RR = 0.78, 95%CI:0.58-1.06).ConclusionsCompared with warfarin, the use of DOACs in AF patients at risk of falling is significantly associated with reduced risks of hemorrhagic stroke, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding.

Project description:BackgroundUse of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is endorsed by current guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However efficacy and safety of NOACs in patients undergoing catheter ablation (RFCA) of AF has not been well established yet.ObjectivesTo perform a meta-analysis of all studies comparing NOACs and vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (VKAs) in patients undergoing RFCA.Data sourcesStudies were searched for in PubMed and Google Scholar databases.Study eligibility criteriaStudies were considered eligible if: they evaluated the clinical impact of NOACs versus VKAs; they specifically analyzed the use of anticoagulants during periprocedural phase of RFCA; they reported clinical outcome data.Study appraisal and synthesis methods25 studies were selected, including 9881 cases. The summary measure used was the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The random-effects or the fixed effect model were used to synthesize results from the selected studies.ResultsThere was no significant difference in thromboembolic complications (RR 1.39; p=0.13). Bleeding complications were significantly lower in the NOACs-treated arm as compared to VKAs (RR=0.67, p<0.001). Interestingly, a larger number of thromboembolic events was found in the VKAs-treated arm in those studies where VKAs had been interrupted during the periprocedural phase (RR=0.68; p=ns). In this same subgroup a significantly higher incidence of both minor (RR=0.54; p=0.002) and major bleeding (RR=0.41; p=0.01) events was recorded. Conversely, the incidence of thromboembolic events in the VKAs-treated arm was significantly lower in those studies with uninterrupted periprocedural anticoagulation treatment (RR=1.89; p=0.02).LimitationsAs with every meta-analysis, no patients-level data were available.Conclusions and implicationsThe use of NOACs in patients undergoing RFCA is safe, given the lower incidence of bleedings observed with NOACs. On the other side, periprocedural interruption of VKAs and bridging with heparin is associated with a higher bleeding rate with no significant benefit on onset of thromboembolic events.

Project description:BackgroundDirect-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have demonstrated superior efficacy in preventing stroke and death compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but their influence on dementia risk remains unclear.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative risks of dementia in DOAC vs warfarin in patients with AF.MethodsAn electronic literature search was conducted to retrieve studies reporting comparisons of dementia incidence between patients treated with DOACs and warfarin for AF. HRs and 95% CI were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. Meta-regression was performed to identify prognostic baseline variables. Network meta-analysis was performed to determine dementia risk between individual DOACs and warfarin.ResultsTen studies (n = 342,624) were retrieved. DOAC was associated with a significantly lower risk of developing dementia compared with warfarin (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.80-0.98; P = 0.017; I2 = 75%); significance was also seen in Asian patients (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.86) but not non-Asian patients. Subgroup analyses of propensity score-matched studies and patients aged 65-75 years showed similar significance, but not for patients aged ≥75 years. Meta-regression found that a lower mean age corresponded to significantly greater favoring of DOAC over warfarin. Network meta-analysis found significant reductions in dementia risk over warfarin for rivaroxaban (HR: 0.854; 95% CI: 0.763-0.955), apixaban (HR: 0.881; 95% CI: 0.778-0.997), and dabigatran (HR: 0.871; 95% CI: 0.770-0.987); the highest-ranked treatment based on P scores was edoxaban.ConclusionsThe use of DOAC in AF significantly reduces dementia risk compared with warfarin, particularly in Asian patients. The possible reversal of this effect with increasing age merits further randomized trials with long-term follow-up. (Dementia Risk of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; CRD42022365634).

Project description:Background: Recent observational studies have compared effectiveness and safety profiles between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the confounders may exist due to the nature of clinical practice-based data, thus potentially influencing the reliability of results. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the effect of NOACs with warfarin based on the propensity score-based observational studies vs. randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: Articles included were systematically searched from the PubMed and EMBASE databases until March 2021 to obtain relevant studies. The primary outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were extracted and then pooled by the random-effects model. Results: A total of 20 propensity score-based observational studies and 4 RCTs were included. Compared with warfarin, dabigatran (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.71-0.96]), rivaroxaban (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.75-0.85]), apixaban (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.86]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.60-0.83]) were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, whereas dabigatran (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65-0.87]), apixaban (HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56-0.67]), and edoxaban (HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.45-0.74]) but not rivaroxaban (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.84-1.00]) were significantly associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding based on the observational studies. Furthermore, the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg was significantly lower in observational studies than that in the RE-LY trial, whereas the pooled results of observational studies were similar to the data from the corresponding RCTs in other comparisons. Conclusion: Data from propensity score-based observational studies and NOAC trials consistently suggest that the use of four individual NOACs is non-inferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF patients.

Dataset Information

Direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonist on dementia risk in atrial fibrillation: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Publications

Direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonist on dementia risk in atrial fibrillation: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets