Randomized controlled clinical trials versus real-life atrial fibrillation patients treated with oral anticoagulants. Do we treat the same patients?

随机对照临床试验与接受口服抗凝剂治疗的真实房颤患者进行比较。我们治疗的是同一批患者吗?

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare clinical characteristics of real-life atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with populations included in randomized clinical trials (ROCKET AF and RE-LY). METHODS: The analysis included 3528 patients who are participants of the ongoing, multicentre, retrospective CRAFT study. The study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02987062. The study is based on a retrospective analysis of hospital records of AF patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) (acenocoumarol, warfarin) and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (dabigatran, rivaroxaban). CHADS2 score was used for risk of stroke stratification. RESULTS: VKA was prescribed in 1973 (56.0%), while NOAC in 1549 (44.0%), including dabigatran - 504 (14.3%) and rivaroxaban - 1051 (29.8%), of the 3528 patients. VKA patients in the CRAFT study were at significantly lower risk of stroke (CHADS2 1.9 ± 1.3), compared with the VKA population from the RE-LY (2.1 ± 1.1) and the ROCKET-AF (3.5 ± 1.0). Patients in the CRAFT study treated with NOAC (CHADS2 for patients on dabigatran 150 mg - 1.3 ± 1.2 and on rivaroxaban - 2.2 ± 1.4) had lower risk than patients from the RE-LY (2.2 ± 1.2) and the ROCKET AF (3.5 ± 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world patients had a lower risk of stroke than patients included in the RE-LY and ROCKET AF trials.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。