Internal Medicine, Hospital Virgen de La Luz, Cuenca, Spain.
Thromb Res. 2012 Aug;130(2):183-91. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2012.02.011. Epub 2012 Mar 15.
To compare the main efficacy and safety endpoints of the pivotal randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention after total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement with the new oral anticoagulants (NAs) versus enoxaparin.
A pool-analysis of 10 RCTs that included 32.144 randomised patients was performed. Efficacy outcomes were total VTE and all-cause mortality, major VTE, and proximal DVT. Safety outcomes were major bleeding, and clinically relevant (major or non-major) bleeding.
Overall, a significant effect favouring NAs was found for the primary efficacy outcome (RR 0.71; 95%CI 0.56-0.90), major VTE (RR 0.59; 95%CI 0.41-0.84), and proximal DVT (RR 0.51; 95%CI 0.35-0.76). Compared to enoxaparin 40 mg QD, rivaroxaban showed superiority (RR 0.50; 95%CI 0.34-0.73), followed by apixaban (RR 0.63; 95%CI 0.36-1.01) and dabigatran (RR 1.02; 95%CI 0.86-1.20). There was significant heterogeneity among trials and subgroups analysed for these efficacy outcomes. Major bleeding (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.74-1.46) and clinically relevant bleeding (RR 1.03; 95%CI 0.88-1.21) was similar with NAs or enoxaparin. Rivaroxaban showed a trend toward more major bleeding episodes than enoxaparin (RR 1.88; 95%CI 0.92-3.82) and apixaban showed the lowest clinically relevant bleeding risk (RR 0.81; 95%CI 0.64-1.01).
Overall, NAs showed more efficacy and same safety when compared to the recommended dose of enoxaparin after THR and TKR. There are little differences in efficacy and bleeding risk among NAs and the type of prophylaxis that should be analysed further.
比较新型口服抗凝药物(NA)与依诺肝素预防全髋关节置换术(THR)或全膝关节置换术(TKR)后静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)的主要疗效和安全性终点,分析关键性随机临床试验(RCT)。
对纳入 32144 名随机患者的 10 项 RCT 进行汇总分析。疗效终点为总 VTE 和全因死亡率、主要 VTE 和近端 DVT。安全性终点为大出血和临床相关(主要或非主要)出血。
总体而言,NA 组在主要疗效终点(RR 0.71;95%CI 0.56-0.90)、主要 VTE(RR 0.59;95%CI 0.41-0.84)和近端 DVT(RR 0.51;95%CI 0.35-0.76)方面具有显著优势。与依诺肝素 40mg QD 相比,利伐沙班具有优势(RR 0.50;95%CI 0.34-0.73),其次是阿哌沙班(RR 0.63;95%CI 0.36-1.01)和达比加群(RR 1.02;95%CI 0.86-1.20)。这些疗效结局的分析中,试验间和亚组间存在显著异质性。NA 组或依诺肝素组的大出血(RR 1.04;95%CI 0.74-1.46)和临床相关出血(RR 1.03;95%CI 0.88-1.21)相似。与依诺肝素相比,利伐沙班的大出血事件发生率呈上升趋势(RR 1.88;95%CI 0.92-3.82),而阿哌沙班的临床相关出血风险最低(RR 0.81;95%CI 0.64-1.01)。
与 THR 和 TKR 后推荐剂量的依诺肝素相比,NA 总体上显示出更好的疗效和相同的安全性。NA 之间以及不同预防类型之间在疗效和出血风险方面差异较小,需要进一步分析。