Abstract

We compared the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with those of warfarin in the long-term (≥6 months) treatment of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). We searched electronic databases up to November 2023 to compare the use of DOACs and warfarin in CVT management. Modified Rankin scores (mRS), new intracranial hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, recurrence and nonrecanalisation events were used to assess outcome. RevMan v5.4 software and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method were utilized to analyse data. A total of 25 studies involving 2301 patients were identified as having treated CVT with either DOACs or warfarin. Good long-term mRS scores 0-2 (risk ratio [RR] = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.98-1.03; p = 0.61), new intracranial hemorrhage (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.48-2.08; p = 0.99), all-cause mortality (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.50-1.98; p = 0.99), nonrecanalisation (RR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.77-1.18; p = 0.65) and recurrence venous thrombosis events (RR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.33-1.22; p = 0.17) were similar between the two treatment arms. Subgroup analysis found recurrence of venous thrombosis was lower in the rivaroxaban group compared to warfarin (2.2% vs. 8.5%, RR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.11-0.98; p = 0.05). DOACs and warfarin provide comparable long-term safety and efficacy profiles. DOACs may be preferred over warfarin due to their ease of clinical management.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.