Meta-analysis study on direct oral anticoagulants vs warfarin therapy in atrial fibrillation and PCI: Dual or triple approach?

Abstract

BackgroundDual antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulants may be required in the case of coexistence of coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing (PCI), with associated increased bleeding rates. The introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), however, significantly reduced the incidence of bleeding complications in this clinical setting of patients. We therefore sought to assess whether the recent publication of the AUGUSTUS and ENTRUST-AF PCI studies significantly impacted current evidence on the use of DOACs in AF patients treated with PCI.MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies enrolling patients with nonvalvular AF undergoing PCI. We assessed pooled estimates of risk ratios (RRs) and 95%CIs for any bleeding (AB), cardiovascular events (CVE), and death at follow-up: 12,542 patients have been included in the analysis. We particularly analyzed data comparing dual anti-thrombotic therapy (DOAC plus single anti-platelet therapy) with triple (DOAC plus dual anti-platelet therapy).ResultsWhen compared with patients receiving standard triple therapy with warfarin, patients receiving DOACs had a significantly lower risk of AB (RR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.61–0.70, p < 0.00001) and of MB (RR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53–0.73, p < 0.00001). The risk of cardiovascular events and mortality were comparable between DOAC and VKA groups (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93–1.18, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.94–1.37, respectively, p n.s.). Similar results were observed comparing triple therapy vs dual therapy.ConclusionsDOACs are safer than and as effective as warfarin when used in patients with AF undergoing PCI; dual therapy with DOACs is comparable to triple therapy in terms of safety and efficacy.