Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Aims</h3><p>Left ventricular (LV) thrombus is increasingly detected in patients with and without ischaemic heart disease due to the increased availability of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Risk factors include anterior ST elevation myocardial infarction, delayed reperfusion therapy, and non‐ischaemic cardiomyopathy with severe LV systolic dysfunction. We aimed to report the characteristics and outcomes of patients with LV thrombus treated with either vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) with a view to describing differences in efficacy, specifically, subsequent thromboembolic events, thrombus resolution, and also side effects of therapy including clinically significant bleeding.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods and results</h3><p>We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of patients diagnosed with LV thrombus between 1 December 2012 and 30 June 2018 and treated with either DOAC or VKA. We recorded patient demographics, past medical history, prescribed medications, and baseline investigations. The primary outcomes were rates of thromboembolism and clinically significant bleeding, with secondary outcomes of thrombus resolution on repeat cardiac imaging, repeat hospitalization, and all‐cause mortality. During the study period, 84 patients were diagnosed with and managed for LV thrombus. Of these, 62 received VKA and 22 DOAC including 13 prescribed rivaroxaban, eight apixaban, and one dabigatran. Most patients 75 (89%) were male with an average age of 62 ± 14 years. Ischaemic heart disease was the cause of LV impairment in 73 (87%) patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups at baseline. Most <i>n</i> = 55 (65%) were co‐prescribed a single antiplatelet agent and 32 (38%) received dual‐antiplatelet therapy. During an average follow‐up of 3.0 ± 1.4 years, there were no statistically significant differences between VKA and DOAC in rates of stroke (2% vs. 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.55), other thromboemboli (2% vs. 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.55), or clinically significant bleeding (10% vs. 0%, <i>P</i> = 0.13). The average interval to cardiac imaging follow‐up was 233 ± 251 days and was not different between groups (<i>P</i> = 0.83), and there was no difference in the rate of resolution of thrombus (76% vs. 65% <i>P</i> = 0.33). Rehospitalization (50% vs. 45%: <i>P</i> = 0.53) and all‐cause mortality (10% vs. 14%; <i>P</i> = 0.61) were also similar. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusions</h3><p>Our data suggest that DOACs are likely to be at least as effective and safe as VKA for stroke prevention in patients with LV thrombus and, despite their lack of a licence for this indication, are therefore likely to represent a reasonable and more convenient option for this setting. The optimal timing and type of anticoagulation for LV thrombus, as well as the role of screening for high‐risk patients, should be tested in prospective, randomized trials.</p></section>

Warfarin Vs. Direct Oral Anticoagulants For Left Ventricle Thrombus Treatment

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

Direct oral anticoagulant use in left ventricular thrombus

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies and Randomized Controlled Trials

Direct oral anticoagulants compared to vitamin K antagonist for the management of left ventricular thrombus

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared with Vitamin K Antagonists for Left Ventricular Thrombus: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Comparative analysis of vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants for left ventricular thrombus management: a retrospective study utilising TriNetX

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Abstract WP19: Is Direct Oral Anticoagulant More Effective Than Warfarin to Reduce Size of Left Atrial Thrombus in Stroke Patients?

Comparative effectiveness and safety of DOACs vs. VKAs in treatment of left ventricular thrombus- a meta-analysis update

Non–vitamin K oral anticoagulants versus warfarin for the treatment of left ventricular thrombus

Oral anticoagulation in patients with left ventricular thrombus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data

Efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin in left ventricular thrombus in myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta-analysis

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin in adults with durable left ventricular assist devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Left Atrial Appendage Thrombosis and Oral Anticoagulants: A Meta-Analysis of Risk and Treatment Response

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

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

Time Trends of Etiology, Treatment, and Long-Term Outcomes Among Patients with Left Ventricular Thrombus

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

Comparison of warfarin versus DOACs in patients with concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation undergoing TAVI; results from the ATLAS registry

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