A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage with Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Publication/Presentation Date

7-2018

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The comparative risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) among direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the difference in risk of ICH between DOACs.

METHODS: 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL (Inception - 31 December 2017). Estimates were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CR.I) in Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), and OR with 95% confidence interval (CI) in traditional meta-analyses. Relative ranking probability of each group was generated based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).

RESULTS: In NMA of 116,618 patients from 17 RCTs (apixaban = 19,495 patients, rivaroxaban =14,157 patients, dabigatran=16,074 patients, edoxaban = 11,652 patients, and comparator = 55,315 patients), all DOACs were safer than warfarin for risk of ICH. Dabigatran 110 mg ranked as the safest drug (SUCRA, 0.85) and reduced the risk of ICH by 56% compared to rivaroxaban (OR: 0.44, 95% Cr. I, 0.22-0.82). Pairwise meta-analysis validated these findings, showing that DOACs were safer than warfarin (OR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.59). Subgroup analysis showed that the benefit was present when DOACs were used in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) (OR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.38-0.68) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) (OR: 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.58).

CONCLUSION: Dabigatran 110 mg may be the safest choice among any anticoagulant regarding risk of ICH. Both dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg were safer than rivaroxaban. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Volume

16

Issue

7

First Page

1296

Last Page

1306

ISSN

1538-7836

PubMedID

29723935

Department(s)

Department of Medicine, Department of Medicine Faculty

Document Type

Article

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS