ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in secondary stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. METHODS: PubMed and Embase electronic databases were systematically searched from January 2009 to July 2019 for relevant randomized clinical trials and observational studies. A random-effects model was applied in the pooled analysis. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies (4 randomized clinical trials and 10 observational studies) were included. Based on the randomized clinical trials, compared with VKA use, the use of NOACs was associated with decreased risk of stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding. Based on the observational studies, compared with VKAs, the subgroup analysis showed that dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism, whereas dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a decreased risk of major bleeding. CONCLUSION: Based on current data, the use of NOACs is at least non-inferior to the use of VKAs in AF patients for secondary stroke prevention irrespective of NOAC type.
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Antithrombins/administration & dosage , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Secondary Prevention , Stroke/prevention & control , Administration, Oral , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Antithrombins/adverse effects , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , Dabigatran/administration & dosage , Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects , Humans , Intracranial Hemorrhages/chemically induced , Observational Studies as Topic , Pyrazoles/administration & dosage , Pyridines/administration & dosage , Pyridones/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Factors , Rivaroxaban/administration & dosage , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/epidemiology , Thiazoles/administration & dosage , Treatment Outcome , Vitamin K/antagonists & inhibitors , Warfarin/administration & dosageABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and peripheral artery disease (PAD) remain largely unknown. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to explore the effects of NOACs versus warfarin in this population. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases, with no linguistic restrictions, until December 2019 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. A random-effects model using an inverse variance method was selected to pool the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of six studies (three post hoc analyses of RCTs and three cohort studies) were included in this meta-analysis. Among AF patients treated with NOACs and warfarin, individuals with PAD had increased rates of all-cause death (RR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.48) and cardiovascular death (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.06-1.64) compared with those without PAD. In AF patients with PAD, we observed a similar risk of thromboembolic events, bleeding, and death with NOACs as with warfarin. In addition, there were no interactions between PAD and non-PAD subgroups regarding any of the reported outcomes of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients (all Pinteraction > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on current evidence, AF patients with PAD are at a higher risk of death than those without PAD. Efficacy and safety outcomes with NOACs are comparable to those with warfarin, suggesting that the use of NOACs has effects similar to warfarin in AF patients with concomitant PAD.
Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Peripheral Arterial Disease/therapy , Warfarin/administration & dosage , Administration, Oral , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/mortality , Factor Xa Inhibitors/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Peripheral Arterial Disease/diagnosis , Peripheral Arterial Disease/mortality , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Vitamin K/antagonists & inhibitors , Warfarin/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Several studies investigated the role of physical activity in atrial fibrillation (AF), but the results remain controversial. We aimed to estimate the association between physical activity and incident AF, as well as to determine whether a sex difference existed. We systematically retrieved relevant studies from Cochrane Library, PubMed, and ScienceDirect through December 1, 2015. Data were abstracted from eligible studies and effect estimates pooled using a random-effects model. Thirteen prospective studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. For primary analysis, neither total physical activity exposure (relative risk [RR]: 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-1.06, P = 0.62) nor intensive physical activity (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.93-1.25, P = 0.41) was associated with a significant increased risk of AF. In the country-stratified analysis, the pooled results were not significantly changed. However, in the sex-stratified analysis, total physical activity exposure was associated with an increased risk of AF in men (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.37), especially at age <50 years (RR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.28-1.95), with a significantly reduced risk of AF in women (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.87-0.97). Additionally, male individuals with intensive physical activity had a slightly higher (although statistically nonsignificant) risk of developing AF (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.99-1.28), but there was a significantly reduced risk of incident AF in women (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-0.98). Published literature supports a sex difference in the association between physical activity and incident AF. Increasing physical activity is probably associated with an increased risk of AF in men and a decreased risk in women.
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , Exercise , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/prevention & control , Chi-Square Distribution , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Prospective Studies , Protective Factors , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Sex FactorsABSTRACT
Two validated scoring systems for predicting embolic risk, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc, contribute to optimizing antithrombotic prescription practices in patients who have atrial fibrillation. However, data about anticoagulated patients are sparse. We compared CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc, in terms of their predictive risk evaluation, in patients with atrial fibrillation who were and were not taking anticoagulants. We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases for studies of the comparative diagnostic performance of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc. We identified 12 cohort studies for meta-analysis. With regard to the occurrence of cardiovascular events individually, patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores ≥2 have a greater risk of stroke (risk ratio [RR]=5.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.85-6.88; P <0.00001) and thromboembolism (RR=5.96; 95% CI, 5.50-6.45; P <0.00001) (P diff=0.34) than do patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores <2, independent of anticoagulation therapy (RR=5.76; 95% CI, 5.23-6.35; P <0.00001 in anticoagulated patients; and RR=6.12; 95% CI, 5.40-6.93; P <0.00001 in patients not taking anticoagulants; P diff=0.45). The pooled RR estimates indicate an approximate 6-fold increase in the risk of endpoint events in patients with CHA2DS2-VASc scores ≥2 (RR=5.90; 95% CI, 5.46-6.37; P <0.0001). These results clearly indicate the discriminative capacity of the CHA2DS2-VASc score for stroke, thromboembolic events, or both, independent of optimal anticoagulation. The CHA2DS2-VASc score enables the identification of patients who are at genuinely high risk and can direct the selection of appropriate therapeutic approaches.
