Suppr超能文献

利伐沙班与达比加群对高出血风险非瓣膜性心房颤动患者临床益处的比较研究

A comparative study of the clinical benefits of rivaroxaban and dabigatran in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with high bleeding risk.

作者信息

Liu Penghui

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, The Huai He Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng, China.

出版信息

Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Sep 17;11:1445970. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1445970. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran are approved to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, the clinical benefits of rivaroxaban and dabigatran in people with high bleeding risk are unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on NVAF patients admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from May 31, 2016 to May 31, 2019. These patients had a high risk of bleeding and were taking at least one study medication. The aim of the study was to evaluate clinical benefits by comparing the efficacy and safety risks of these two medications.

RESULTS

A total of 1,301 patients with high bleeding risk were enrolled, including 787 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 514 patients in the dabigatran group. Results of the primary efficacy benefit endpoint were obtained from 104 patients (13.21%) in the rivaroxaban group and 81 (15.76%) patients in the dabigatran group [hazard ratio (HR): 0.860; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.637-1.162;  = 0.327], this indicates that there was no significant difference between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in preventing stroke and systemic embolism in patients with high bleeding risk NVAF. The principal safety end points were observed in 49 (6.23%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and in 36 (7.00%) patients in the dabigatran group (HR: 0.801 in the rivaroxaban group; 95% CI: 0.512-1.255;  = 0.333), this indicates that there was no a significant difference in reducing fatal bleeding and critical organ bleeding. With respect to secondary efficacy and benefit endpoints, 28 (3.56%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and 26 (5.06%) patients in the dabigatran group died, with an HR of 0.725 (95% CI: 0.425-1.238;  = 0.239); 32 (4.07%) patients in the rivaroxaban group; and 31 (6.03%) patients in the dabigatran group had myocardial infarction (MI), with an HR of 0.668 (95% CI: 0.405-1.102,  = 0.114) in the rivaroxaban group, this indicates that there was no significant difference between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in preventing all-cause death and MI.

CONCLUSIONS

In NVAF patients with high bleeding risk, there was no significant difference between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in preventing stroke and systemic embolism. There was also no significant difference between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in reducing fatal and critical organ bleeding.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, identifier ChiCTR2100052454.

摘要

目的

利伐沙班和达比加群已被批准用于降低非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者的中风风险。然而,利伐沙班和达比加群在高出血风险人群中的临床益处尚不清楚。

方法

对2016年5月31日至2019年5月31日在郑州大学第一附属医院住院的NVAF患者进行回顾性研究。这些患者有高出血风险且正在服用至少一种研究药物。该研究的目的是通过比较这两种药物的疗效和安全风险来评估临床益处。

结果

共纳入1301例高出血风险患者,其中利伐沙班组787例,达比加群组514例。利伐沙班组104例(13.21%)和达比加群组81例(15.76%)患者获得了主要疗效终点结果[风险比(HR):0.860;95%置信区间(CI):0.637-1.162;P = 0.327],这表明在高出血风险NVAF患者中,达比加群和利伐沙班在预防中风和全身性栓塞方面无显著差异。利伐沙班组49例(6.23%)和达比加群组36例(7.00%)患者观察到主要安全终点(利伐沙班组HR:0.801;95%CI:0.512-1.255;P = 0.333),这表明在减少致命性出血和关键器官出血方面无显著差异。关于次要疗效和益处终点,利伐沙班组28例(3.56%)和达比加群组26例(5.06%)患者死亡,HR为0.725(95%CI:0.425-1.238;P = 0.239);利伐沙班组32例(4.07%)和达比加群组31例(6.03%)患者发生心肌梗死(MI),利伐沙班组HR为0.668(95%CI:0.405-1.102,P = 0.114),这表明在预防全因死亡和MI方面,达比加群和利伐沙班无显著差异。

结论

在高出血风险的NVAF患者中,达比加群和利伐沙班在预防中风和全身性栓塞方面无显著差异。在减少致命性和关键器官出血方面,达比加群和利伐沙班也无显著差异。

临床试验注册

中国临床试验注册中心,标识符ChiCTR2100052454 。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a3ad/11445759/b487ef22e56f/fcvm-11-1445970-g001.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