Suppr超能文献

与华法林相比,利伐沙班在房颤中的净临床获益:来自 ROCKET AF 的结果。

Net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in atrial fibrillation: Results from ROCKET AF.

机构信息

Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, United States.

Terrence Donnelly Heart Centre, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2018 Apr 15;257:78-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.06.110.

Abstract

AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine the net clinical benefit (NCB) of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 14,236 patients included in ROCKET AF who received at least one dose of study drug. We analyzed NCB using four different methods: (1) composite of death, stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding; (2) method 1 with fatal or critical organ bleeding substituted for major bleeding; (3) difference between the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism minus 1.5 times the difference between the rate of intracranial hemorrhage; and (4) weighted sum of differences between rates of death, ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, intracranial hemorrhage, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

Rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism (rate difference per 10,000 patient-years [RD]=-86.8 [95% CI -143.6 to -30.0]) and fatal or critical organ bleeding (-41.3 [-68 to -14.7]). However, rivaroxaban was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding other than fatal or critical organ bleeding (55.9 [14.7 to 97.2]). Method 1 showed no difference between treatments (-35.5 [-108.4 to 37.3]). Methods 2-4 favored treatment with rivaroxaban (2: -96.8 [-157.0 to -36.8]; 3: -65.2 [-112.3 to -17.8]; 4: -54.8 [-96.0 to -10.2]).

CONCLUSIONS

Rivaroxaban was associated with favorable NCB compared with warfarin. The NCB was attributable to lower rates of ischemic events and fatal or critical organ bleeding.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定与华法林相比,利伐沙班在房颤患者中的净临床获益(NCB)。

方法

这是对 ROCKET AF 中纳入的至少接受一剂研究药物的 14236 名患者进行的回顾性分析。我们使用四种不同的方法分析 NCB:(1)死亡、中风、全身性栓塞、心肌梗死和大出血的综合结果;(2)用致命或关键器官出血替代大出血的方法 1;(3)缺血性中风或全身性栓塞率与颅内出血率之差减去 1.5 倍;(4)死亡率、缺血性中风或全身性栓塞、颅内出血和大出血率之间的差异的加权和。

结果

利伐沙班与死亡、心肌梗死、中风或全身性栓塞(每 10000 患者年的发生率差异[RD]=-86.8[95%CI-143.6 至-30.0])和致命或关键器官出血(-41.3[-68 至-14.7])的复合结局风险降低相关。然而,利伐沙班与除致命或关键器官出血外的大出血风险增加相关(55.9[14.7 至 97.2])。方法 1 显示两种治疗方法之间无差异(-35.5[-108.4 至 37.3])。方法 2-4 更倾向于利伐沙班治疗(2:-96.8[-157.0 至-36.8];3:-65.2[-112.3 至-17.8];4:-54.8[-96.0 至-10.2])。

结论

与华法林相比,利伐沙班与有利的 NCB 相关。NCB 归因于缺血事件和致命或关键器官出血发生率较低。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验