Suppr超能文献

基于 SAMe-TTR 评分的华法林与非维生素 K 拮抗剂口服抗凝剂比较房颤患者的疗效和安全性结局。

Efficacy and safety outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation compared between warfarin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants based on SAMe-TTR score.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Central Chest Institute of Thailand, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Her Majesty Cardiac Center, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2023 Jan 23;23(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s12872-023-03053-w.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) compared between those taking warfarin and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) based on SAMe-TTR score.

METHODS

AF patients using warfarin or NOACs were enrolled from Thailand's COOL-AF registry. A low SAMe-TTR score was defined as a score of 0-2. The efficacy outcomes were all-cause death, ischemic stroke (IS), transient ischemic attack (TIA), and/or systemic embolization (SE). The safety outcome was major bleeding (MB). The secondary outcome was a combination of cardiovascular (CV) death, IS/TIA/SE, or MB. Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare the event rate between the AF patients taking warfarin and NOACs according to SAMe-TTR score.

RESULTS

A total of 2568 AF patients taking oral anticoagulants were enrolled. Warfarin and NOACs were used in 2340 (91.1%) and 228 (8.9%) patients, respectively. Among overall patients, 305 patients taking warfarin (13.0%) and 21 patients taking NOACs (9.2%) had the efficacy outcome, while 155 patients taking warfarin (6.6%) and 11 patients taking NOACs (4.8%) had the safety outcome. After adjustment for confounders, overall patients taking warfarin had significantly more secondary outcome than those taking NOACs (11.4% vs. 7.5%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.74, 95% confidence interval: 1.01-2.99; p = 0.045) regardless of SAMe-TTR score.

CONCLUSIONS

AF patients taking warfarin had a significantly higher CV death or IS/TIA/SE or MB compared to those taking NOACs regardless of SAMe-TTR score. The results of this study do not support the use of SAMe-TTR score to guide OAC selection.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在根据 SAMe-TTR 评分比较服用华法林和非维生素 K 拮抗剂口服抗凝剂 (NOAC) 的房颤 (AF) 患者的疗效和安全性结局。

方法

从泰国 COOL-AF 登记处招募使用华法林或 NOAC 的 AF 患者。低 SAMe-TTR 评分定义为评分 0-2。疗效结局为全因死亡、缺血性卒中 (IS)、短暂性脑缺血发作 (TIA) 和/或全身性栓塞 (SE)。安全性结局为大出血 (MB)。次要结局为心血管 (CV) 死亡、IS/TIA/SE 或 MB 的组合。使用 Cox 比例风险模型比较根据 SAMe-TTR 评分,服用华法林和 NOAC 的 AF 患者的事件发生率。

结果

共纳入 2568 例服用口服抗凝剂的 AF 患者。华法林和 NOAC 分别用于 2340 例 (91.1%) 和 228 例 (8.9%) 患者。在所有患者中,305 例服用华法林 (13.0%) 和 21 例服用 NOAC (9.2%) 的患者出现疗效结局,而 155 例服用华法林 (6.6%) 和 11 例服用 NOAC (4.8%) 的患者出现安全性结局。调整混杂因素后,服用华法林的所有患者的次要结局发生率明显高于服用 NOAC 的患者 (分别为 11.4%和 7.5%;调整后的风险比:1.74,95%置信区间:1.01-2.99;p=0.045),无论 SAMe-TTR 评分如何。

结论

无论 SAMe-TTR 评分如何,服用华法林的 AF 患者的 CV 死亡或 IS/TIA/SE 或 MB 发生率明显高于服用 NOAC 的患者。本研究结果不支持使用 SAMe-TTR 评分来指导 OAC 选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a409/9869584/da28796774c9/12872_2023_3053_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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