• Yujiro Yokoyama, Alexandros Briasoulis, Hiroki Ueyama, Makoto Mori, Masao Iwagami, Naoki Misumida, Hisato Takagi, and Toshiki Kuno.
• Department of Surgery, St. Luke's University Health Network, Bethlehem, Pa.
• J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2023 Jun 1; 165 (6): 20522059.e42052-2059.e4.

BackgroundThe optimal anticoagulation strategy for patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis using updated evidence comparing direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation.MethodsMedline and Embase were searched through March 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies investigating the outcomes of DOAC therapy and VKA therapy in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, major bleeding, and stroke or systemic embolism.ResultsOur analysis included 4 RCTs and 6 observational studies enrolling a total of 6405 patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation assigned to a DOAC group (n = 2142) or a VKA group (n = 4263). Pooled analysis demonstrated the similar rates of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-1.05; P = .18; I2 = 0%) in the DOAC and VKA groups. However, the rate of major bleeding was significantly lower in the DOAC group (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89; P = .006; I2 = 0%), whereas the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was similar in the 2 groups (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.44-1.17; P = .18; I2 = 39%).ConclusionsDOAC might decrease the risk of major bleeding without increasing the risk of stroke or systemic embolism or all-cause death compared with VKA in patients with bioprosthetic valves and atrial fibrillation.Copyright © 2021 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…