Abstract
Abstract Background Adequate anticoagulation in catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) is crucial in preventing both thromboembolic events and life-threatening bleeding. As clinicians gain more experience and reassurance with data from clinical trials, the usage of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients undergoing catheter ablation of AF has rapidly increased over the last years. The purpose of this updated meta-analysis was to assess the latest evidence and compare the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted and minimally interrupted periprocedural DOAC anticoagulation protocols with uninterrupted Vitamin K Antagonists (VKA) in this setting. Methods Randomized or prospective controlled observational studies comparing DOACs to VKAs were identified with multiple databases (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus). Uninterrupted and minimally interrupted DOAC (single dose of dabigatran or apixaban withheld) were distinguished, VKA therapy was always uninterrupted. The primary outcomes were stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and net clinical benefit. Results 32 studies were included in the final analysis, encompassing a total of 19.437 patients. The incidence of thromboembolic events was rare (less than 0.2%), with no significant difference between groups. Occurrence of major bleeding and net clinical benefit were significantly improved in patients assigned to uninterrupted DOAC treatment compared to VKAs (1.5% vs 2.2%, POR: 0.74, CI: 0.56–0.98, I2=0,0% and 1.7% vs 2.4%, POR: 0.76; CI: 0.59–0.99, I2=0,0%, respectively). Net clinical benefit Conclusion This updated meta-analysis, based on a large database, showed that DOAC therapy is equally effective as VKA in preventing stroke and TIA. Minimally-interrupted DOAC therapy is a non-inferior peri-procedural anticoagulation strategy, however, uninterrupted DOAC therapy showed superiority when compared to VKA regarding major, life-threatening bleeding. Our findings showed that uninterrupted periprocedural DOAC therapy is a safe and preferable alternative to VKAs in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Acknowledgement/Funding This study was supported by an Economic Development and Innovation Operative Programme Grant (GINOP 2.3.2-15-2016-00048).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
