Suppr超能文献

直接口服抗凝剂与其他策略在伴有房颤和卒中和/或短暂性脑缺血发作的患者中的比较:系统评价。

Direct oral anticoagulants compared with other strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation and stroke or transient ischemic attack: Systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi Branch, Chiayi, Taiwan.

Department of Neurology, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi Branch, Chiayi, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Formos Med Assoc. 2024 May;123(5):551-560. doi: 10.1016/j.jfma.2023.10.007. Epub 2023 Oct 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

For patients with atrial fibrillation and a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), the risk-benefit of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared to alternative treatment approaches has not been firmly established. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate efficacy and safety of DOACs vs warfarin and DOACs vs aspirin or placebo in patients with AF and a prior stroke or TIA.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 2000, to January 31, 2023, to find RCTs. Risk ratio (RR) with 95 % CI measured the association of DOACs vs warfarin, and DOACs vs aspirin or placebo, with clinical outcomes. Primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism and primary safety outcome was ICH.

RESULTS

We identified 7 RCTs with 19,111 patients with AF and a prior stroke or TIA, of which 5 trials compared DOACs with warfarin and 2 trials compared DOACs vs aspirin or placebo. Compared with warfarin, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism (RR, 0.85; 95 % CI, 0.75-0.97) and ICH (RR, 0.53; 95 % CI, 0.41-0.68). Compared with aspirin or placebo, DOACs were associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism (RR, 0.33; 95 % CI, 0.19-0.58) and risk of ICH did not differ between apixaban and aspirin.

CONCLUSION

This contemporary evaluation of the literature indicates that DOACs, rather than other antithrombotic agents or no treatment, should be used in patients with AF and a prior stroke or TIA.

摘要

背景

对于有房颤和既往卒中或短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)的患者,直接口服抗凝剂(DOAC)与其他治疗方法相比的风险效益尚未得到明确证实。我们进行了一项系统评价,以评估 DOAC 与华法林以及 DOAC 与阿司匹林或安慰剂在有房颤和既往卒中或 TIA 的患者中的疗效和安全性。

方法

我们检索了 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 1 月 31 日期间的 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 中央对照试验注册库,以寻找 RCT。风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间用于衡量 DOAC 与华法林和 DOAC 与阿司匹林或安慰剂的临床结局。主要疗效终点是卒中或全身性栓塞,主要安全性终点是颅内出血(ICH)。

结果

我们确定了 7 项 RCT,涉及 19111 例有房颤和既往卒中或 TIA 的患者,其中 5 项试验比较了 DOAC 与华法林,2 项试验比较了 DOAC 与阿司匹林或安慰剂。与华法林相比,DOAC 降低了卒中或全身性栓塞(RR,0.85;95%置信区间,0.75-0.97)和 ICH(RR,0.53;95%置信区间,0.41-0.68)的风险。与阿司匹林或安慰剂相比,DOAC 降低了卒中或全身性栓塞(RR,0.33;95%置信区间,0.19-0.58)的风险,阿哌沙班与阿司匹林的 ICH 风险无差异。

结论

对现有文献的这一当代评估表明,DOAC 而不是其他抗血栓药物或不治疗,应在有房颤和既往卒中或 TIA 的患者中使用。

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