Inert components: Are they really so?

M. Stanghellini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02980334

IF: 1.809

1997-03-01

Phytoparasitica

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Hardware architecture of bi-cubic convolution interpolation for real-time image scaling

Gopinath Mahale,H. Mahale,Rajesh Babu Parimi,S. Nandy,S. Bhattacharya

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/FPT.2014.7082790

2014-12-01

Abstract:This paper presents two hardware architectures of bi-cubic convolution interpolation termed Parallelized Row Column Interpolation Architecture (PRCIA) and Serialized Row Column Interpolation Architecture (SRCIA) for real-time image scaling. These architectures factor in the challenges of high computational complexity, redundant computations and repeated memory accesses, which were otherwise not explicitly addressed in existing architectures. Besides, the proposed architectures also employ parallel computations to improve the throughput for realtime applications. The proposed architectures have been emulated and tested on Virtex-6 FPGA. The emulated PRCIA and SRCIA are able to scale input grayscale images of dimensions up to 640 × 480 at 59 and 48 frames per second respectively with arbitrary scaling factors up to 4 in both dimensions.
Antiplatelet Strategies and Outcomes in Patients with Noncardioembolic Ischemic Stroke from a Real-World Study with a Five-Year Follow-Up

Huimin Xu,Yanting Ping,Haoran Lin,Ping He,Wenlu Li,Haibin Dai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12975-016-0516-0

2016-01-01

Translational Stroke Research

Abstract:Aspirin and clopidogrel are both acceptable antiplatelet options for the secondary prevention of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke. Associations between Essen Stroke Risk Score (ESRS) and antiplatelet treatment in Chinese patients with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke were assessed. This retrospective study was taken in a tertiary care hospital located in eastern China. Patients with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke hospitalized during January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2011, were classified according to ESRS during index stroke hospitalization. Antiplatelet strategy at the time of discharge was categorized as aspirin (100 mg/day) vs. clopidogrel (75 mg/day). Patients received follow-up from July 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015, and the efficacy of clopidogrel and aspirin in different ESRS subgroups was assessed with respect to reducing the risk of a combined vascular event of recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or primary intracranial hemorrhage. Totally, 1175 non-cardiac stroke patients were included, among which 878 patients completed follow-up surveys. Of the patients who completed the follow-up, 458 (52.2%) had an ESRS > 3, and 621 (70.7%) received aspirin. Patients who received clopidogrel tended to be older, and more patients had hypertension, diabetes, and an ESRS > 3 than patients who received aspirin. Over a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, the rate of combined vascular events was 19.3% in the aspirin group and 16.7% in the clopidogrel group. Compared with clopidogrel-treated patients, a significant ( P = 0.044) reduction in combined vascular events in aspirin-treated patients was observed in patients with an ESRS ≤ 3 (OR, odds ratio 0.5; 95% CI 0.3 to 0.9). However, a significant ( P = 0.002) increase in combined vascular events was observed in patients with an ESRS > 3 (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.3 to 3.8). More clopidogrel-treated patients with ESRS < 3 and ESRS = 3 discontinued treatment than their counterparts who took aspirin ( P < 0.05). Adverse drug events, such as digestive discomfort and bleeding, were similar. In conclusion, clopidogrel is suggested for patients with an ESRS > 3 and aspirin for patients with an ESRS ≤ 3 for the secondary prevention of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke in Chinese patients.
Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of stroke in AF with arterial origin stroke: a meta-analysis.

Mingxia Li,Hong Lin,Jiankuan Shi,Qianru Yang,Jianjun Li,Xiaolong Zhang,Ying Zhang,YiBo Tian,Fangfang Ge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.18775/v1

2019-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background Anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy were adopted respectively for the prevention ofcardio-embolic stroke or arterial origin stroke. while it’s difficult to make decisions for individual with Atrial fibrillation(AF)and arterial origin stroke as comorbidities, so we attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety ofanticoagulants and antiplatelet forthe prevention of stroke in AF with arterial origin stroke and make an optimal treatment for these comorbidities. Methods Databases included PubMed, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to 31 Aug 2019. Eight RCTs with 77048 participants were enrolled. Results Direct oral anticoagulants(DOACs) reduced the relative risk of stroke and systemic embolism by 15% (95%CI 0.75-0.97, I2=65.6%) and the major bleeding by 23%(95%CI 0.63-0.95, I2=92.3%,). DOACs or warfarin plus aspirin compared with DOACs or warfarin alone did not show the benefit on stroke and systemic embolism prevent in AF patients, but increase the risk of major bleeding with RR 1.40 (95%CI 1.13-1.75,) and 1.33（95%CI 1.09-1.63）respectively. No differences in preventionof ischemic stroke were detected between OACs versus aspirin in arterial origin stroke. The major bleeding was significantly higher in the OACs group (RR,2.40,1.46-3.94, I2=62.2%). However, compared with aspirin, rivaroxabandid not increase the risk of major bleeding in Branch atheromatous stroke (RR,1.54,95%CI 0.26-9.12). Conclusions We speculatedthat DOACs alone may be enough to prevent stroke recurrence and not to increase the risk of bleeding in AF patients with arterial origin stroke. The well designed RCTs with the direct comparison would be needed in future.
Anticoagulation strategy for patients presenting with ischemic strokes while using a direct oral anticoagulant: A systematic review and meta-analysis

João Paulo Mota Telles,Giulia Isadora Cenci,Gabriel Marinheiro,Gabriela Borges Nager,Rebeka Bustamante Rocha,Fernanda Ferreira Bomtempo,Eberval Gadelha Figueiredo,Gisele Sampaio Silva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930241270443

2024-08-09

Abstract:Background: While direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have established efficacy in reducing the risk of ischemic stroke, they still leave a residual risk of stroke, which may be greater in practice (0.7-2.3%) than in controlled clinical trial settings. This meta-analysis examines four therapeutic approaches following a stroke in patients already on DOACs: continuing with the same DOAC, changing to a different DOAC, increasing the current DOAC dosage, or switching to a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), such as warfarin. Methods: Systematic review of literature from the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases, was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The analysis focused on six studies with varied patient demographics, examining as outcomes as recurrent ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other bleeding events, and mortality. Results: Six studies comprising 12,159 patients were included, all of them were observational. Patients who remained on their initial DOAC regimen had a lower risk of experiencing ischemic strokes (risk ratio (RR) 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.70; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.25-0.55; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), and hemorrhagic events (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.30-0.63; p < 0.001; I2 = 6%) compared to those who were switched to warfarin, with an increase in mortality rates (hazard ratio (HR) 1.85; 95% CI 1.06-3.24; p = 0.03; I2 = 84%). In contrast, neither changing to a different DOAC nor adjusting the dose proved to be more effective than the original regimen. Conclusion: Post-stroke adjustments to anticoagulation therapy-whether altering the drug or its dosage-do not yield additional benefits. In addition, the results suggest that warfarin may be less effective than DOACs for preventing stroke recurrence, bleeding complications, and death in this patient population.
Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: assessing net clinical benefit

William F McIntyre,Alexander P Benz,Nedim Tojaga,Axel Brandes,Renato D Lopes,Jeff S Healey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartjsupp/suae075

2024-07-01

European Heart Journal Supplements

Abstract:Abstract Subclinical, device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently recorded by pacemakers and other implanted cardiac rhythm devices. Patients with device-detected AF have an elevated risk of stroke, but a lower risk of stroke than similar patients with clinical AF captured with surface electrocardiogram. Two randomized clinical trials (NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA) have tested a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) against aspirin or placebo. A study-level meta-analysis of the two trials found that treatment with a DOAC resulted in a 32% reduction in ischaemic stroke and a 62% increase in major bleeding; the results of the two trials were consistent. The annualized rate of stroke in the control arms was ∼1%. Several factors point towards overall net benefit from DOAC treatment for patients with device-detected AF. Strokes in ARTESiA were frequently fatal or disabling and bleeds were rarely lethal. The higher absolute rates of major bleeding compared with ischaemic stroke while on treatment with a DOAC in the two trials are consistent with the ratio of bleeds to strokes seen in the pivotal DOAC vs. warfarin trials in patients with clinical AF. Prior research has concluded that patients place a higher emphasis on stroke prevention than on bleeding. Further research is needed to identify the characteristics that will help identify patients with device-detected AF who will receive the greatest benefit from DOAC treatment.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Donna Shu-Han Lin,Hao-Yun Lo,Kuan-Chih Huang,Ting-Tse Lin,Jen-Kuang Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.030380

2023-12-05

Abstract:Background: Although older patients with atrial fibrillation are at heightened risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events, their optimal treatment choice remains uncertain. Methods and results: This meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials that compared thromboembolic or bleeding outcomes between a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and reported outcomes for patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation. The efficacy outcome was the composite of stroke and systemic embolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding, any clinically relevant bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage. Each DOAC and VKA was compared pairwise in a network meta-analysis. High- and low-dose regimens and factor IIa and Xa inhibitors were also compared. Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Stroke and systemic embolism risks did not differ significantly among DOACs. There were no significant differences in major bleeding between each DOAC and VKA. Intracranial hemorrhage risk was significantly lower with dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban than with VKA and rivaroxaban, which had similar risks. High-dose regimens led to lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism compared with VKA and low-dose regimens, with both doses having similar bleeding risks. Conclusions: In patients aged ≥75 years with atrial fibrillation, DOACs were associated with fewer thromboembolic events compared with VKA, whereas dabigatran, apixaban, and edoxaban were associated with lower risks of intracranial hemorrhage compared with VKA and rivaroxaban. Registration: URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifier: CRD42022329557.
Direct Oral Anticoagulation vs Antiplatelet Therapy and Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage

Mark Coyle,Amy Lynch,Meave Higgins,Maria Costello,Conor Judge,Martin O’Donnell,Catriona Reddin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.49017

2024-12-06

JAMA Network Open

Abstract:Importance For patients with atrial fibrillation, clinicians often prescribe antiplatelet therapy rather than oral anticoagulation, which may be related to a concern that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are associated with a higher risk of intracranial bleeding, despite being less effective for stroke prevention. Objective To determine whether DOAC therapy, compared with single-agent antiplatelet therapy, was associated with an increased risk of intracranial and major hemorrhage. Data Sources A systematic search of PubMed and Embase databases from inception to February 7, 2024, was performed. Study Selection Randomized clinical trials that compared DOAC therapy with single-agent antiplatelet therapies were included. Trials with active follow-up of less than 30 days or a sample size less than 200 were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guideline. Data were extracted independently by 2 researchers. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to report pooled treatment effects and 95% CIs. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was occurrence of intracranial hemorrhage. Results A total of 9 randomized clinical trials were included (45 494 participants). DOAC therapy was not associated with significantly higher odds of intracranial hemorrhage compared with antiplatelet therapy (0.55% vs 0.48% over a mean trial follow-up of 17.1 months; odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% CI, 0.71-1.88), but there was heterogeneity among trials ( I 2 = 53.7%). In an analysis by DOAC agent, the respective estimates for intracranial hemorrhage risk were as follows: rivaroxaban, OR, 2.09 (95% CI, 1.20-3.64); dabigatran, OR, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.61-1.64); and apixaban, OR, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.44-1.17). Overall, DOAC therapy was associated with higher odds of major hemorrhage compared with antiplatelet therapy (2.41% vs 1.76% over a mean trial follow-up of 15.5 months; OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.07-1.80), with the following estimates by agent: rivaroxaban, OR, 1.91 (95% CI, 1.22-3.00); dabigatran; OR, 1.21 (95% CI, 0.86-1.69); and apixaban, OR, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.73-1.63). Conclusions and Relevance In this systematic review and meta-analysis, DOAC therapy was not associated with a significantly higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage compared with antiplatelet therapy, but was associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage. These findings support the safety of DOAC compared with antiplatelet therapy with respect to risk of ICH and reinforce adherence with current atrial fibrillation guidelines.

medicine, general & internal
Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant vs. Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolism in Patients With Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation With Valvular Heart Disease—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Januar Wibawa Martha,Raymond Pranata,Wilson Matthew Raffaelo,Arief Wibowo,Mohammad Rizki Akbar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.764356

IF: 3.6

2021-12-16

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Abstract:Purpose: There is uncertainty as to which anticoagulant should be used in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) with valvular heart disease. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin in patients with non-valvular AF with valvular heart disease. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov from the inception of databases up until August 2, 2021, and the search was updated and finalized on October 17, 2021. The intervention group was DOACs and the control group was warfarin. The primary outcome was systemic embolism and stroke (SSE), and the secondary outcome was major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. The pooled effect estimate was reported as the hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR). Results: There were 21,185 patients from seven studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke and systemic embolism were lower in patients receiving DOACs [HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.67, 0.87), p < 0.001; I 2 : 5%] compared with warfarin. The subgroup analysis on RCTs showed the significant reduction of SSE in the DOACs group [HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.60, 0.89), p = 0.002; I 2 : 16%]. There was no significant difference in terms of major bleeding [HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.75, 1.05), p = 0.18; I 2 : 69%]. Intracranial hemorrhage [HR 0.42 (95% CI 0.22, 0.80), p = 0.008; I 2 : 73%] were lower in the DOAC group. Conclusion: This meta-analysis indicates that DOACs were associated with a lower risk of SSE and intracranial hemorrhage compared with patients receiving warfarin. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of major bleeding.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Device-Detected Atrial Fibrillation: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA Trials

William F. McIntyre,Alexander P. Benz,Nina Becher,Jeffrey S. Healey,Christopher B. Granger,Lena Rivard,A. John Camm,Andreas Goette,Antonia Zapf,Marco Alings,Stuart J. Connolly,Paulus Kirchhof,Renato D. Lopes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.123.067512

IF: 37.8

2023-11-12

Circulation

Abstract:Background: Device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) (also known as subclinical AF or atrial high-rate episodes) is a common finding in patients with an implanted cardiac rhythm device and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Whether oral anticoagulation is effective and safe in this patient population is unclear. Methods: We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase for randomized trials comparing oral anticoagulation to antiplatelet or no antithrombotic therapy in adults with device-detected AF recorded by a pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, cardiac resynchronization therapy device or implanted cardiac monitor. We used random-effects models for meta-analysis and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE framework. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO CRD42023463212). Results: From 785 unique citations, we identified two randomized trials with relevant clinical outcome data; NOAH-AFNET 6 (2,536 participants) evaluated edoxaban and ARTESiA (4,012 participants) evaluated apixaban. Meta-analysis demonstrated that oral anticoagulation with these agents reduced ischemic stroke (relative risk [RR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.92; high-quality evidence). The results from the two trials were consistent (I 2 statistic for heterogeneity=0%). Oral anticoagulation also reduced a composite of cardiovascular death, all-cause stroke, peripheral arterial embolism, myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-1.00, I 2 =0%; moderate-quality evidence). There was no reduction in cardiovascular death (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76-1.17, I 2 =0%; moderate-quality evidence) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96-1.21 I 2 =0%; moderate-quality evidence). Oral anticoagulation increased major bleeding (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.05-2.5 I 2 =61%; high-quality evidence). Conclusions: The results of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials are consistent with each other. Meta-analysis of these two large randomized trials provides high-quality evidence that oral anticoagulation with edoxaban or apixaban reduces the risk of stroke in patients with device-detected AF and increases the risk of major bleeding.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease
Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists after recent ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation

David J. Seiffge,Maurizio Paciaroni,Duncan Wilson,Masatoshi Koga,Kosmas Macha,Manuel Cappellari,Sabine Schaedelin,Clare Shakeshaft,Masahito Takagi,Georgios Tsivgoulis,Bruno Bonetti,Bernd Kallmünzer,Shoji Arihiro,Andrea Alberti,Alexandros A. Polymeris,Gareth Ambler,Sohei Yoshimura,Michele Venti,Leo H. Bonati,Keith W. Muir,Hiroshi Yamagami,Sebastian Thilemann,Riccardo Altavilla,Nils Peters,Manabu Inoue,Tobias Bobinger,Giancarlo Agnelli,Martin M. Brown,Shoichiro Sato,Monica Acciarresi,Hans Rolf Jager,Paolo Bovi,Stefan Schwab,Philippe Lyrer,Valeria Caso,Kazunori Toyoda,David J. Werring,Stefan T. Engelter,Gian Marco De Marchis,RAF on behalf of the CROMIS‐2,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25489

IF: 11.2

2019-04-30

Annals of Neurology

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: We compared outcomes after treatment with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and a recent cerebral ischemia.METHODS: We conducted an individual patient data analysis of seven prospective cohort studies. We included patients with AF and a recent cerebral ischemia (<3 months before starting oral anticoagulation) and a minimum follow-up of 3 months. We analyzed the association between type of anticoagulation (DOAC versus VKA) with the composite primary endpoint (recurrent ischemic stroke [AIS], intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH], or mortality) using mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards regression models; we calculated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).RESULTS: We included 4,912 patients (median age, 78 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 71-84]; 2,331 [47.5%] women; median National Institute of Health Stroke Severity Scale at onset, 5 [IQR, 2-12]); 2,256 (45.9%) patients received VKAs and 2,656 (54.1%) DOACs. Median time from index event to starting oral anticoagulation was 5 days (IQR, 2-14) for VKAs and 5 days (IQR, 2-11) for DOACs (p = 0.53). There were 262 acute ischemic strokes (AISs; 4.4%/year), 71 intracranial hemorrrhages (ICHs; 1.2%/year), and 439 deaths (7.4%/year) during the total follow-up of 5,970 patient-years. Compared to VKAs, DOAC treatment was associated with reduced risks of the composite endpoint (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00; p = 0.05) and ICH (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.71; p < 0.01); we found no differences for the risk of recurrent AIS (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.70-1.19; p = 0.5) and mortality (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.68-1.03; p = 0.09).INTERPRETATION: DOAC treatment commenced early after recent cerebral ischemia related to AF was associated with reduced risk of poor clinical outcomes compared to VKA, mainly attributed to lower risks of ICH. ANN NEUROL 2019;85:823-834.

neurosciences,clinical neurology
Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients With Antiphospholipid Syndromes: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Candrika D Khairani,Antoine Bejjani,Gregory Piazza,David Jimenez,Manuel Monreal,Saurav Chatterjee,Vittorio Pengo,Scott C Woller,Josefina Cortes-Hernandez,Jean M Connors,Yogendra Kanthi,Harlan M Krumholz,Saskia Middeldorp,Anna Falanga,Mary Cushman,Samuel Z Goldhaber,David A Garcia,Behnood Bikdeli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.10.008

2023-01-03

Abstract:Background: The efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome remain controversial. Objectives: The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared DOACs with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through April 9, 2022. The 2 main efficacy outcomes were a composite of arterial thrombotic events and venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Random effects models with inverse variance were used. Results: Our search retrieved 253 studies. Four open-label randomized controlled trials involving 472 patients were included (mean control-arm time-in-therapeutic-range 60%). All had proper random sequence generation and adequate allocation concealment. Overall, the use of DOACs compared with VKAs was associated with increased odds of subsequent arterial thrombotic events (OR: 5.43; 95% CI: 1.87-15.75; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), especially stroke, and the composite of arterial thrombotic events or VTE (OR: 4.46; 95% CI: 1.12-17.84; P = 0.03, I2 = 0%). The odds of subsequent VTE (OR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.31-4.55; P = 0.79, I2 = 0%), or major bleeding (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.42-2.47; P = 0.97; I2 = 0%) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Most findings were consistent within subgroups. Conclusions: Patients with thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome randomized to DOACs compared with VKAs appear to have increased risk for arterial thrombosis. No significant differences were observed between patients randomized to DOACs vs VKAs in the risk of subsequent VTE or major bleeding.
Safety of the direct-acting anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.

Rong Fen,Jia Bin,Huang Pinxian,Lynn Henry S,Zhang Wei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2015.04.004

IF: 10.407

2015-01-01

Thrombosis Research

Abstract:Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is known as one of the independent risk factors for stroke and might significantly increase its risk. Nowadays, direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been developed and demonstrated a more promising option to warfarin, the conclusion for safety is heterogeneous in different studies. It indicates the importance of comprehensive comparison of safety between DOACs and warfarin. Material and Methods: Four studies including ARISTOTLE, ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48, RE-LY and ROCKET-AF were included in the meta-analysis to perform separate meta-analyses for high-dose regimen, low-dose regimen and their combination. The events included major bleeding, intracranial haemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding, non-major clinically relevant and minor bleeding. Results: Regardless of high dose or low dose regimen, DOACs were associated with lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage but due to no significant association for gastrointestinal bleeding, the overall effect measured by the major bleeding was also insignificant (High dose: RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; Low dose: RR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.04). However, the combined result of high-dose and low-dose regimens showed DOACs were associated with lower risk of major bleeding events (RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.95). Conclusions: Meta-analyses have showed the comparative safety of the direct-acting oral anticoagulants than warfarin in most end points and even better in intracranial haemorrhage. Therefore, without the need of INR monitoring, DOACs demonstrated promising alternatives to warfarin in prevention of stroke in patients with AF. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Abstract 25: Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Recent Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Malik Ghannam,Mohammad Almajali,Farid Khasiyev,Milagros Galecio-Castillo,Abdullah Al Qudah,Dana Ghazaleh,Mahmoud Dibas,Juan Vivanco-Suarez,Aaron Rodriguez,Mudassir Farooqui,Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/str.55.suppl_1.25

IF: 10.17

2024-02-01

Stroke

Abstract:Introduction: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is efficacious treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, certain circumstances associated with increased bleeding risk, such as recent direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) intake limits its use. Nonetheless, emerging evidence has shown promising results in this patient group. We investigated the safety and efficacy of IVT in patients with AIS and recent DOAC use. Methods: We conducted systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions evaluating IVT with recent DOAC use. Outcomes of interest were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), any ICH, serious systemic bleeding (SSB), and 90-day functional independence (mRS 0-2). Moreover, we calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) for each outcome using a random effect meta-analysis to compare the rates between the patients with DOAC and non-DOAC upon IVT. Ultimately, we completed a sensitivity analysis for idarucizumab, NIHSS, and the timing of DOAC administration. Results: Our meta-analysis included 14 studies with 247079 patients (3610 in DOAC and 243469 in non-DOAC). In the DOAC group, the rate of sICH was 3% (95%CI 3 - 4%), any ICH was 12% (95%CI 7 - 19%), SSB 0.7% (95%CI 0 - 1%), and 90-day mRS 0-2 was 57% (95%CI 43 - 70%). No difference in the rates of sICH (3.4vs.3.5%; OR=0.95; 95%CI 0.67 - 1.36), any ICH (17.7vs.17.3%; OR=1.23; 95%CI 0.61 - 2.48), SSB (0.7vs.0.6%; OR=1.27; 95%CI 0.79 - 2.02), and 90-day mRS 0-2 (46.4vs.56.8%; OR=1.21; 95%CI 0.400 - 3.67) was found between DOAC and non-DOAC groups. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference in the sICH rate between idaricuzumab and no idaricizumab administration prior to IVT [Figure 1]. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrated no significant difference in functional independence and hemorrhagic complication rates in AIS patients treated with IVT with recent DOAC compared to the no-DOAC group. Further prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to shed more light on this topic.

peripheral vascular disease,clinical neurology
Comparing Efficacy and Safety Between Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Taking Direct Oral Anticoagulants or Warfarin After Direct Oral Anticoagulant Failure

Meng-Tsang Hsieh,Chi-Hung Liu,Sheng-Hsiang Lin,Po-Yu Lin,Yu-Ming Chang,Chun-Min Wang,Chih-Hung Chen,Pi-Shan Sung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.123.029979

2023-12-05

Abstract:Background: An increased risk of recurrent stroke is noted in patients with atrial fibrillation despite direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use. We investigated the efficacy and safety of treatment with each of 4 different DOACs or warfarin after DOAC failure. Methods and results: We retrospectively analyzed patients with atrial fibrillation with ischemic stroke despite DOAC treatment between January 2002 and December 2016. The different outcomes of patients with DOAC failure were compared, including recurrent ischemic stroke, major cardiovascular events, intracranial hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage, mortality, and net composite outcomes according to switching to different DOACs or vitamin K antagonist after index ischemic stroke. We identified 3759 patients with DOAC failure. A total of 84 patients experienced recurrent ischemic stroke after switching to different oral anticoagulants, with a total follow-up time of 14 years. Using the vitamin K antagonist group as a reference, switching to any of the 4 DOACs was associated with a 69% to 77% reduced risk of major cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.25 [95% CI, 0.16-0.39] for apixaban, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.14-0.37] for dabigatran, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.09-0.60] for edoxaban, and 0.31 [95% CI, 0.21-0.45] for rivaroxaban), and a 69% to 83% reduced risk of net composite outcomes (aHR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.18-0.35] for apixaban, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.11-0.25] for dabigatran, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.17-0.56] for edoxaban, and 0.31 [95% CI, 0.23-0.41] for rivaroxaban). Conclusions: In Asian patients with DOAC failure, continuing DOACs after index stroke was associated with fewer undesirable outcomes than switching to a vitamin K antagonist. Alternative pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies warrant investigation.
Alphavirus structure: activation for entry at the target cell surface.

M. Vaney,S. Duquerroy,F. Rey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coviro.2013.04.003

IF: 7.121

2013-04-01

Current Opinion in Virology

Abstract:
Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban Versus Aspirin in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source and Carotid Atherosclerosis.

George Ntaios,Balakumar Swaminathan,Scott D. Berkowitz,Rubens José Gagliardi,Wilfried Lang,James E. Siegler,Pablo Lavados,Hardi Mundl,Natan Bornstein,Elena Meseguer,Pierre Amarenco,Brett Cucchiara,Pol Camps-Renom,Konstantinos Makaritsis,Eleni Korompoki,Vasileios Papavasileiou,Joan Marti-Fabregas,Haralampos Milionis,Konstantinos Vemmos,Stuart J. Connolly,Robert G. Hart,on behalf of the NAVIGATE ESUS Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025168

IF: 10.17

2019-11-22

Stroke

Abstract:The sources of emboli in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) are multiple and may not respond uniformly to anticoagulation. In this exploratory subgroup analysis of patients with carotid atherosclerosis in the NAVIGATE (New Approach Rivaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global Trial Versus ASA to Prevent Embolism)-ESUS trial, we assessed whether the treatment effect in this subgroup is consistent with the overall trial population and investigated the association of carotid atherosclerosis with recurrent ischemic stroke. Carotid atherosclerosis was analyzed either as the presence of mild (ie, 20%–49%) atherosclerotic stenosis or, separately, as the presence of carotid plaque. Primary efficacy outcome was ischemic stroke recurrence. Safety outcomes were major bleeding and symptomatic intracerebral bleeding. Carotid plaque was present in 40% of participants and mild carotid stenosis in 11%. There was no significant difference in ischemic stroke recurrence between rivaroxaban- and aspirin-treated patients among 490 patients with carotid stenosis (5.0 versus 5.9/100 patient-years, respectively, hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.39–1.87; P for interaction of treatment effect with patients without carotid stenosis 0.78) and among 2905 patients with carotid plaques (5.9 versus 4.9/100 patient-years, respectively, HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.86–1.68; P for interaction of treatment effect with patients without carotid stenosis 0.2). Among patients with carotid plaque, major bleeding was more frequent in rivaroxaban-treated patients compared with aspirin-treated (2.0 versus 0.5/100 patient-years, HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 1.63–8.65). Patients with carotid stenosis had similar rate of ischemic stroke recurrence compared with those without (5.4 versus 4.9/100 patient-years, respectively, HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.73–1.69), but there was a strong trend of higher rate of ischemic stroke recurrence in patients with carotid plaque compared with those without (5.4 versus 4.3/100 patient-years, respectively, HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.99–1.54). In ESUS patients with carotid atherosclerosis, we found no difference in efficacy between rivaroxaban and aspirin for prevention of recurrent stroke, but aspirin was safer, consistent with the overall trial results. Carotid plaque was much more often present ipsilateral to the qualifying ischemic stroke than contralateral, supporting an important etiological role of nonstenotic carotid disease in ESUS. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02313909.

peripheral vascular disease,clinical neurology
Meta-Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus

Mounica Vorla,Dinesh K. Kalra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ph17060708

IF: 4.6

2024-05-31

Pharmaceuticals

Abstract:Background: Literature on the preferred anticoagulant for treating left ventricular thrombus (LVT) is lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare the efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin in treating LVT. Methods: Databases were searched for RCTs and adjusted observational studies that compared DOAC versus warfarin through March 2024. The primary efficacy outcomes of interest were LVT resolution, systemic embolism, composite of stroke, and TIA. The primary safety outcomes encompassed all-cause mortality and bleeding events. Results: Our meta-analysis including 31 studies demonstrated that DOAC use was associated with higher odds of thrombus resolution (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.86–1.31, p: 0.46). A statistically significant reduction in the risk of stroke/TIA was observed in the DOAC group versus the warfarin group (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.48–0.89, p: 0.007). Furthermore, statistically significant reduced risks of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.47–0.98, p: 0.04) and bleeding events (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55–0.89, p: 0.004) were observed with DOAC use as compared to warfarin use. Conclusion: Compared to VKAs, DOACs are noninferior as the anticoagulant of choice for LVT treatment. However, further studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

pharmacology & pharmacy,chemistry, medicinal
Time to benefit and harm of direct oral anticoagulants in device-detected atrial fibrillation: A pooled analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials

Chuanyi Huang,Linjie Li,Wennan Liu,Yiwen Fang,Shichen Jiang,Yongle Li,Gregg C Fonarow,Ching-Hui Sia,Leonard L L Yeo,Benjamin Y Q Tan,Gregory Y H Lip,Qing Yang,Xin Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.06.038

IF: 6.779

2024-06-24

Heart Rhythm

Abstract:Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) reduce stroke risk in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation (DD-AFib) but increase major bleeding risk. The time to benefit (TTB) and time to harm (TTH) are not well quantified. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine TTB and TTH in DOAC-treated patients with DD-AFib. Methods: Studies were identified from PubMed searching until November 2023. The primary efficacy outcome was the time to the first stroke event, and the primary safety outcome was the time to the first major bleeding event. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) and its confidence interval (CI) were calculated through reconstructed patient-level data and study-level data. Weibull model and Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation were applied to determine time to specific absolute risk change thresholds. Results: Two trials involving DOACs-NOAH-AFNET 6 (Non-vitamin K antagonist Oral anticoagulants in patients with Atrial High rate episodes) and ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation)-were identified, which randomized 6548 adults with a mean age of >75 years and a median atrial high-rate episode duration ranging from 1.5 to 2.8 hours. DOACs decreased the risk of stroke (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.50-0.90) but increased the risk of major bleeding (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.21-2.04). A TTB of 2.67 years was needed to prevent 1 stroke per 100 DOAC-treated patients, while a TTH of 1.67 years was needed to observe 1 major bleeding. Conclusion: In elderly patients with low durations of DD-AFib, DOACs result in a delayed and restricted stroke-preventive benefit while posing an early-onset bleeding risk. Our findings offer new insights into the risk-benefit profile and provide clinicians an additional dimension to facilitate shared decision-making discussions with patients.
Comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on anticoagulants and aspirin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients.

Zhi-Hong Xu,Na Zhang,Zhi-Qiang Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.9.0089

2023-09-27

European review for medical and pharmacological sciences

Abstract:OBJECTIVE Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is a common manifestation of cardiac arrhythmia, whose significance is heightened in the context of an aging global population and changing lifestyles, leading to an increased incidence. Stroke prevention in NVAF is a complex challenge that requires a comprehensive exploration of interventions. The emergence of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) is a potential treatment, necessitating a thorough evaluation of their safety and efficacy. As the quest for the best strategy for thrombotic risk in these patients continues, the interaction between DOAC and aspirin has become the focus of research. MATERIALS AND METHODS With a rigorous methodological approach, we conducted a thorough search of scientific databases up to August 2023. The methodology involved meticulous screening, careful data extraction, and rigorous assessment of trial quality, all conducted by two independent investigators. The results were synthesized through standardized mean differences, accompanied by 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS DOACs demonstrated significant enhancements in stroke prevention for NVAF, which was indicated by favorable outcomes in bleeding (RR = 4.04, 95% CI: 3.96, 4.12), coronary artery disease (RR = 2.45, 95% CI: 2.42, 2.48), mortality (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.56), myocardial infarction (RR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.81, 1.88), and stroke (RR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.47, 1.54). Notably, DOACs demonstrated optimal efficacy for NVAF patients with stroke. CONCLUSIONS DOACs may be potentially effective for preventing stroke after NVAF.

Medicine
Benefits and Risks of Clopidogrel vs. Aspirin Monotherapy after Recent Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Maurizio Paciaroni,Birsen Ince,Bo Hu,Jiann-Shing Jeng,Kursad Kutluk,Liping Liu,Min Lou,Vladimir Parfenov,Ka Sing Lawrence Wong,Babak Zamani,Dara Paek,Jung Min Han,Michael del Aguila,Shalini Girotra

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1607181

2019-12-01

Cardiovascular Therapeutics

Abstract:Aim. Though combination of clopidogrel added to aspirin has been compared to aspirin alone in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack, limited data exists on the relative efficacy and safety between clopidogrel and aspirin monotherapy in patients with a recent ischemic stroke. We aimed to compare clopidogrel versus aspirin monotherapy in this population. Methods. PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception to May 2018 to identify clinical trials and observational studies comparing clopidogrel versus aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with recent ischemic stroke within 12 months. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random effects model and were reported as risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Results. Five studies meeting eligibility criteria were included in the analysis. A total of 29,357 adult patients who had recent ischemic stroke received either clopidogrel ( n = 14 , 293 ) or aspirin ( n = 15 , 064 ) for secondary prevention. Pairwise meta-analysis showed a statistically significant risk reduction in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (risk ratio 0.72 [95% CI, 0.53–0.97]), any ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke (0.76 [0.58, 0.99), and recurrent ischemic stroke (0.72 [0.55, 0.94]) in patients who received clopidogrel versus aspirin. The risk of bleeding was also lower for clopidogrel versus aspirin (0.57 [0.45, 0.74]). There was no difference in the rate of all-cause mortality between the two groups. Conclusions. The analysis showed lower risks of major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, recurrent stroke, and bleeding events for clopidogrel monotherapy compared to aspirin. These findings support clinical benefit for single antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel over aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with recent ischemic stroke.

pharmacology & pharmacy,cardiac & cardiovascular systems

Inert components: Are they really so?

Hardware architecture of bi-cubic convolution interpolation for real-time image scaling

Antiplatelet Strategies and Outcomes in Patients with Noncardioembolic Ischemic Stroke from a Real-World Study with a Five-Year Follow-Up

Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of stroke in AF with arterial origin stroke: a meta-analysis.

Anticoagulation strategy for patients presenting with ischemic strokes while using a direct oral anticoagulant: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: assessing net clinical benefit

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Older Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Direct Oral Anticoagulation vs Antiplatelet Therapy and Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage

Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant vs. Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolism in Patients With Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation With Valvular Heart Disease—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Device-Detected Atrial Fibrillation: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA Trials

Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists after recent ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation

Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients With Antiphospholipid Syndromes: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Safety of the direct-acting anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis.

Abstract 25: Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Recent Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparing Efficacy and Safety Between Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Taking Direct Oral Anticoagulants or Warfarin After Direct Oral Anticoagulant Failure

Alphavirus structure: activation for entry at the target cell surface.

Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban Versus Aspirin in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source and Carotid Atherosclerosis.

Meta-Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus

Time to benefit and harm of direct oral anticoagulants in device-detected atrial fibrillation: A pooled analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials

Comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on anticoagulants and aspirin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients.

Benefits and Risks of Clopidogrel vs. Aspirin Monotherapy after Recent Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis