Browsing by Subject "transcatheter aortic valve replacement"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Novel oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    (Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2022-04-27) Memon, Muhammad Mustafa; Siddiqui, Asad Ali; Amin, Emaan; Shaikh, Fahd Niaz; Khan, Muhammad Shahzeb; Doukky, Rami; Krasuski, Richard A

    Background

    The efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to the current guideline-recommended vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has not been well established. We pooled evidence from all available studies to assess the risks and benefits of this drug class.

    Methods

    We queried electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane central) up until January 28th, 2022 for studies comparing NOACs to VKAs in AF patients undergoing TAVR. Results from studies were presented as risk ratios (RR) and pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis by study design and meta-regression analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity.

    Results

    A total of 12 studies (3 RCTs and 9 observational) containing 12,203 patients (mean age 81.2 years; 50.5% men) were identified and included in the analysis. Pooled analysis revealed no significant difference between NOACs and VKAs in terms of stroke or systemic embolism (RR: 0.78; p = 0.18), major bleeding (RR: 0.84; p = 0.32), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.61; p = 0.06), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.69; p = 0.07), and myocardial infarction (RR: 1.60; p = 0.24) at a mean length of follow-up of 15.1 months. RCTs and observational studies did not significantly differ across outcomes on subgroup analysis. Meta-regression analysis found heterogeneity in all-cause mortality to be significantly explained by percentage of males (coefficient: 0.049, p = 0.007), mean age (coefficient: 0.221, p < 0.001), and CHA2DS2-VASc score (coefficient: -1.657, p < 0.001).

    Conclusions

    This meta-analysis suggests that outcomes with NOACs do not significantly differ compared to VKAs following TAVR in patients with AF.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Safety and Use of Anticoagulation After Aortic Valve Replacement With Bioprostheses: A Meta-Analysis.
    (Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes, 2016-05) Riaz, Haris; Alansari, Shehab Ahmad Redha; Khan, Muhammad Shahzeb; Riaz, Talha; Raza, Sajjad; Luni, Faraz Khan; Khan, Abdur Rahman; Riaz, Irbaz Bin; Krasuski, Richard A
    BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend 3 months of anticoagulation after replacement of the aortic valve with a bioprosthesis. However, there remains great variability in the current clinical practice and conflicting results from clinical studies. To assist clinical decision making, we pooled the existing evidence to assess whether anticoagulation in the setting of a new bioprosthesis was associated with improved outcomes or greater risk of bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched the PubMed database from the inception of these databases until April 2015 to identify original studies (observational studies or clinical trials) that assessed anticoagulation with warfarin in comparison with either aspirin or no antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. We included the studies if their outcomes included thromboembolism or stroke/transient ischemic attacks and bleeding events. Quality assessment was performed in accordance with the Newland Ottawa Scale, and random effects analysis was used to pool the data from the available studies. I(2) testing was done to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. After screening through 170 articles, a total of 13 studies (cases=6431; controls=18210) were included in the final analyses. The use of warfarin was associated with a significantly increased risk of overall bleeding (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-3.08; P<0.0001) or bleeding risk at 3 months (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.34; P<0.0001) compared with aspirin or placebo. With regard to composite primary outcome variables (risk of venous thromboembolism, stroke, or transient ischemic attack) at 3 months, no significant difference was seen with warfarin (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.56; P=0.67). Moreover, anticoagulation was also not shown to improve outcomes at time interval >3 months (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.58; P=0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the current guidelines, a meta-analysis of previous studies suggests that anticoagulation in the setting of an aortic bioprosthesis significantly increases bleeding risk without a favorable effect on thromboembolic events. Larger, randomized controlled studies should be performed to further guide this clinical practice.