急性缺血性卒中和房颤患者口服抗凝起始的最佳时机:一项综合荟萃分析和系统回顾。

IF 2.8 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Aravind Dilli Babu, Sahib Singh, Asher Gorantla, Mirza Faris Ali Baig, Ram Bhutani, Harika Davuluri, Lekshminarayan Raghavakurup, Bengt Herweg
{"title":"急性缺血性卒中和房颤患者口服抗凝起始的最佳时机:一项综合荟萃分析和系统回顾。","authors":"Aravind Dilli Babu, Sahib Singh, Asher Gorantla, Mirza Faris Ali Baig, Ram Bhutani, Harika Davuluri, Lekshminarayan Raghavakurup, Bengt Herweg","doi":"10.1136/openhrt-2024-003002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The optimal timing for initiating direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke remains controversial due to concerns about haemorrhagic transformation. This study aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of early versus late DOAC initiation. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, searching major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov) up to May 2024. A total of 11 studies were identified, comprising nine cohort studies (75.5% weight) and two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (24.5% weight), involving 13 020 participants. The early DOAC group (mean initiation 3.5±1.29 days) included 6250 participants, while the late group (5.7±1.25 days) had 6770 participants. Outcome measures included recurrent ischaemic stroke (RIS), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), systemic embolism, major haemorrhage (MH), non-major haemorrhage (NMH) and all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis using the Cochrane Review Manager calculated ORs and 95% CIs via the Mantel-Haenszel random effects model. This pooled meta-analysis revealed that the early DOAC group had lower rates of RIS (2.2% vs 2.9%, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98, p=0.04, I<sup>2</sup>=40%) and ICH (0.51% vs 0.93%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.70, p<0.05, I<sup>2</sup>=0%) compared with the late DOAC group. Subgroup analysis of RCTs and cohort studies showed reduced RIS and ICH risks in the early DOAC group, with moderate heterogeneity. In the sensitivity analysis, the early group (<4 days) had a lower risk of RIS compared with the late group (>4 days) without a statistically significant impact on ICH. No significant differences in MH, NMH, systemic embolism or all-cause mortality were observed between either group; however, a limited number of RCTs and moderate heterogeneity weakened the conclusions. Additional RCTs are needed to provide more definitive insights.</p>","PeriodicalId":19505,"journal":{"name":"Open Heart","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603680/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal timing of oral anticoagulation initiation in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Aravind Dilli Babu, Sahib Singh, Asher Gorantla, Mirza Faris Ali Baig, Ram Bhutani, Harika Davuluri, Lekshminarayan Raghavakurup, Bengt Herweg\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/openhrt-2024-003002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The optimal timing for initiating direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke remains controversial due to concerns about haemorrhagic transformation. This study aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of early versus late DOAC initiation. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, searching major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov) up to May 2024. A total of 11 studies were identified, comprising nine cohort studies (75.5% weight) and two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (24.5% weight), involving 13 020 participants. The early DOAC group (mean initiation 3.5±1.29 days) included 6250 participants, while the late group (5.7±1.25 days) had 6770 participants. Outcome measures included recurrent ischaemic stroke (RIS), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), systemic embolism, major haemorrhage (MH), non-major haemorrhage (NMH) and all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis using the Cochrane Review Manager calculated ORs and 95% CIs via the Mantel-Haenszel random effects model. This pooled meta-analysis revealed that the early DOAC group had lower rates of RIS (2.2% vs 2.9%, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98, p=0.04, I<sup>2</sup>=40%) and ICH (0.51% vs 0.93%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.70, p<0.05, I<sup>2</sup>=0%) compared with the late DOAC group. Subgroup analysis of RCTs and cohort studies showed reduced RIS and ICH risks in the early DOAC group, with moderate heterogeneity. In the sensitivity analysis, the early group (<4 days) had a lower risk of RIS compared with the late group (>4 days) without a statistically significant impact on ICH. No significant differences in MH, NMH, systemic embolism or all-cause mortality were observed between either group; however, a limited number of RCTs and moderate heterogeneity weakened the conclusions. Additional RCTs are needed to provide more definitive insights.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Heart\",\"volume\":\"11 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603680/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-003002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Heart","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2024-003002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于担心出血转化,心房颤动和急性缺血性卒中患者开始使用直接口服抗凝剂(DOACs)预防继发性卒中的最佳时机仍然存在争议。本研究旨在分析早期与晚期DOAC起始的有效性和安全性。根据系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,进行了系统评价,检索了截至2024年5月的主要数据库(PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library和ClinicalTrials.gov)。共纳入11项研究,包括9项队列研究(75.5%权重)和2项随机对照试验(rct)(24.5%权重),涉及13020名受试者。早期DOAC组(平均起始3.5±1.29天)包括6250名参与者,而晚期DOAC组(5.7±1.25天)有6770名参与者。结局指标包括复发性缺血性卒中(RIS)、颅内出血(ICH)、全身栓塞、大出血(MH)、非大出血(NMH)和全因死亡率。使用Cochrane Review Manager进行统计分析,通过Mantel-Haenszel随机效应模型计算or和95% ci。该汇总荟萃分析显示,与晚期DOAC组相比,早期DOAC组的RIS发生率(2.2% vs 2.9%, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 ~ 0.98, p=0.04, I2=40%)和ICH发生率(0.51% vs 0.93%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 ~ 0.70, p2=0%)较低。随机对照试验和队列研究的亚组分析显示,早期DOAC组的RIS和ICH风险降低,异质性中等。在敏感性分析中,早期组(4天)对脑出血无统计学意义的影响。两组患者的MH、NMH、全身性栓塞或全因死亡率均无显著差异;然而,有限数量的随机对照试验和中等异质性削弱了结论。需要更多的随机对照试验来提供更明确的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimal timing of oral anticoagulation initiation in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review.

The optimal timing for initiating direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke remains controversial due to concerns about haemorrhagic transformation. This study aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of early versus late DOAC initiation. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, searching major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov) up to May 2024. A total of 11 studies were identified, comprising nine cohort studies (75.5% weight) and two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (24.5% weight), involving 13 020 participants. The early DOAC group (mean initiation 3.5±1.29 days) included 6250 participants, while the late group (5.7±1.25 days) had 6770 participants. Outcome measures included recurrent ischaemic stroke (RIS), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), systemic embolism, major haemorrhage (MH), non-major haemorrhage (NMH) and all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis using the Cochrane Review Manager calculated ORs and 95% CIs via the Mantel-Haenszel random effects model. This pooled meta-analysis revealed that the early DOAC group had lower rates of RIS (2.2% vs 2.9%, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98, p=0.04, I2=40%) and ICH (0.51% vs 0.93%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.70, p<0.05, I2=0%) compared with the late DOAC group. Subgroup analysis of RCTs and cohort studies showed reduced RIS and ICH risks in the early DOAC group, with moderate heterogeneity. In the sensitivity analysis, the early group (<4 days) had a lower risk of RIS compared with the late group (>4 days) without a statistically significant impact on ICH. No significant differences in MH, NMH, systemic embolism or all-cause mortality were observed between either group; however, a limited number of RCTs and moderate heterogeneity weakened the conclusions. Additional RCTs are needed to provide more definitive insights.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Heart
Open Heart CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
145
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Heart is an online-only, open access cardiology journal that aims to be “open” in many ways: open access (free access for all readers), open peer review (unblinded peer review) and open data (data sharing is encouraged). The goal is to ensure maximum transparency and maximum impact on research progress and patient care. The journal is dedicated to publishing high quality, peer reviewed medical research in all disciplines and therapeutic areas of cardiovascular medicine. Research is published across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Opinionated discussions on controversial topics are welcomed. Open Heart aims to operate a fast submission and review process with continuous publication online, to ensure timely, up-to-date research is available worldwide. The journal adheres to a rigorous and transparent peer review process, and all articles go through a statistical assessment to ensure robustness of the analyses. Open Heart is an official journal of the British Cardiovascular Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信