000 04722nam a22008297a 4500
008 161101s20162016 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022 _a0167-5273
040 _aOvid MEDLINE(R)
099 _a26709135
245 _aComparison of Watchman device with new oral anti-coagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: A network meta-analysis.
251 _aInternational Journal of Cardiology. 205:17-22, 2016 Feb 15.
252 _aInt J Cardiol. 205:17-22, 2016 Feb 15.
253 _aInternational journal of cardiology
260 _92016 Feb 15
260 _c2016
260 _f2016
266 _d2017-03-06
520 _aBACKGROUND: New oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and the Watchman device represent an alternative to warfarin for stroke prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, no studies compare these new treatments. We performed a network meta-analysis to indirectly compare Watchman and NOACs among AF patients.
520 _aCONCLUSIONS: NOAC therapy was superior to warfarin for multiple outcomes while Watchman reduced hemorrhagic stroke. Further studies are needed to assess Watchman versus NOAC to optimize therapy for stroke prevention in AF patients.Copyright (c) 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
520 _aMETHODS: We performed a MEDLINE search for studies comparing warfarin with NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) or Watchman in AF patients with reported clinical outcomes. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare NOACs, warfarin and Watchman.
520 _aRESULTS: 14 studies with 246,005 patients were included in the analysis, among which 124,823 were treated with warfarin, 120,450 were treated with NOACs and 732 had Watchman implanted. Mean age was 72 +/- 9 years, 53% were male, and mean CHADS2 score was 2.1 +/- 1.6. Both NOACs and Watchman were superior to warfarin in hemorrhagic stroke prevention (OR = 0.46 [0.30-0.82] and OR = 0.21 [0.05-0.99], respectively). NOACs significantly reduced total stroke (OR = 0.78 [0.58-0.96]) and major bleeding (OR = 0.78 [0.65-0.91]) compared with warfarin. Indirect comparison between NOAC and Watchman revealed no significant differences in outcomes, though there was a trend toward higher rates of ischemic stroke with Watchman compared with NOAC (OR 2.60 [0.60-13.96]) with the opposite findings with hemorrhagic stroke (OR = 0.44 [0.09-2.14]).
546 _aEnglish
650 _a*Anticoagulants/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _a*Atrial Fibrillation/th [Therapy]
650 _a*Defibrillators, Implantable/st [Standards]
650 _aAdministration, Oral
650 _aAnticoagulants/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aAtrial Fibrillation/di [Diagnosis]
650 _aAtrial Fibrillation/ep [Epidemiology]
650 _aClinical Trials as Topic/mt [Methods]
650 _aDabigatran/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aDabigatran/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aDefibrillators, Implantable/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aHemorrhage/ci [Chemically Induced]
650 _aHumans
650 _aPyrazoles/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aPyrazoles/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aPyridines/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aPyridines/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aPyridones/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aPyridones/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aThiazoles/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aThiazoles/ae [Adverse Effects]
650 _aWarfarin/ad [Administration & Dosage]
650 _aWarfarin/ae [Adverse Effects]
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
651 _aMedStar Washington Hospital Center
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
656 _aMedStar Heart Institute
657 _aComparative Study
657 _aJournal Article
657 _aMeta-Analysis
700 _aDidier, Romain
700 _aEscarcega, Ricardo O
700 _aKiramijyan, Starkis
700 _aKoifman, Edward
700 _aLipinski, Michael J
700 _aTorguson, Rebecca
700 _aWaksman, Ron
790 _aDidier R, Escarcega RO, Kiramijyan S, Koifman E, Lipinski MJ, Torguson R, Waksman R
942 _cART
_dArticle
999 _c1978
_d1978