Comparison of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Vitamin K Antagonists for Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Global Retrospective Study.

Am J Med

Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom; Danish Center for Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark; Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland. Electronic address:

Published: November 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • This study evaluates the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for treating left ventricular thrombus, especially after acute myocardial infarction.
  • The analysis included data from nearly 40,000 patients, showing that DOACs led to lower rates of stroke, major bleeding, and systemic embolism compared to VKAs in both acute coronary syndrome and non-acute coronary syndrome groups.
  • Overall, the findings suggest that using DOACs is superior to VKAs for managing left ventricular thrombus, with no significant difference in overall mortality rates.

Article Abstract

Introduction: Guidelines for managing left ventricular thrombus remain limited, particularly when incorporating oral anticoagulants into dual antiplatelet therapy for acute myocardial infarction. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in managing left ventricular thrombus among patients with and without recent myocardial infarction.

Methods: This retrospective observational study used data from the TriNetX research network. Patients with left ventricular thrombus treated with either DOACs or VKAs between December 1, 2013 and December 1, 2023, were included. Subgroup analyses were conducted for patients with or without recent acute coronary syndrome (<1 month). Risk and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were conducted at 90 days after the indexed event.

Results: A total of 39,770 patients were included. DOACs treatment had lower rates of stroke (11.8% vs 13.7%; relative risk [RR] 0.859; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.816-0.905; P < .001), major bleeding (4.8% vs 5.3%; RR 0.902; 95% CI, 0.829-0.982; P = .018), and systemic embolism (3.5% vs 4.2%; RR 0.841; 95% CI, 0.762-0.928; P = .001) compared with VKAs in overall cohort. Within the acute coronary syndrome group (n = 14,302), DOACs had lower stroke (12.3% vs 14.4%, RR 0.860; 95% CI, 0.791-0.935; P < .0001) and systemic embolism (3.1% vs 4%; RR 0.774; 95% CI, 0.651-0.919; P = .003) risks. For non-acute coronary syndrome group (n = 24,162), DOACs had lower stroke (11.4% vs 13.1%; RR 0.868; 95% CI, 0.811-0.929; P < .001) and major bleeding (4.8% vs 5.5%; RR 0.877; 95% CI, 0.787-0.977; P = .017) risks. No significant differences in all-cause mortality were observed across groups.

Conclusion: DOACs demonstrated better safety and efficacy outcomes when compared with VKAs in left ventricular thrombus treatment, with or without recent acute coronary syndrome.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2024.10.042DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

left ventricular
16
ventricular thrombus
16
oral anticoagulants
12
direct oral
8
vitamin antagonists
8
managing left
8
comparison direct
4
anticoagulants vitamin
4
left
4
antagonists left
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!