Meta-analysis of postoperative complications effect comparison between continuous warfarin and heparin bridging after ablation of atrial fibrillation

Hui-ting WU,Cheng QIAN,Jin-ye DING,Bao-zhu WEI,Yang PI,Yang-gan WANG
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-4055.2016.05.03
2016-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the influence of postoperative complications after ablation of atrial fibrillation between two different anticoagulation strategies: continuous warfarin and heparin bridging. Methods Pubmed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang database were systematically searched for eligible studies. We also searched the references of relevant reviews for more trials. Only studies that met our pre-defined included criteria up to 31 June, 2015 were enrolled in our Meta-analysis. Results Fourteen studies, including 13 observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial, were finally included in our study with a total of 17 496 subjects. There were 7909 patients in continuous warfarin group and 9587 patients in heparin bridging group. Compared to heparin bridging, continuous warfarin was associated with fewer stroke or transient ischemic attacks events [RR=0.29, 95%CI:(0.16,0.69), P<0.01]. For bleeding complications, continuous warfarin administration could reduce the risk of major bleeding [RR=0.15, 95%CI:(0.08, 0.29), P<0.01] and minor bleeding [RR=0.70, 95%CI:(0.55, 0.88), P<0.01]. Conclusion Compared with heparin bridging, postoperative continuous warfarin was associated with reduced risks of thromboembolism and bleeding in ablation of atrial fibrillation.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?