Acenocoumarol is a vitamin‐K antagonist (VKA) primarily used in certain countries (e.g. India, Netherlands, Spain). The half‐life of acenocoumarol is similar to that of non‐VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC), unlike warfarin, and this could affect c...
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=O105585904
2021년
eng
0306-5251
1365-2125
SCI;SCIE;SCOPUS
학술저널
British journal of clinical pharmacology
632-643 [※수록면이 p5 이하이면, Review, Columns, Editor's Note, Abstract 등일 경우가 있습니다.]
0
상세조회0
다운로드다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
Acenocoumarol is a vitamin‐K antagonist (VKA) primarily used in certain countries (e.g. India, Netherlands, Spain). The half‐life of acenocoumarol is similar to that of non‐VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC), unlike warfarin, and this could affect c...
Acenocoumarol is a vitamin‐K antagonist (VKA) primarily used in certain countries (e.g. India, Netherlands, Spain). The half‐life of acenocoumarol is similar to that of non‐VKA oral anticoagulants (NOAC), unlike warfarin, and this could affect comparative effectiveness and safety (CES). However, data on CES for NOAC come almost exclusively from studies using warfarin as the comparator. We aimed to assess outcomes of NOAC and acenocoumarol in people with non‐valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in real‐world clinical practice.
This is a population‐based retrospective cohort study. All new users of oral anticoagulants from November 2011 to December 2015 with NVAF were included (n = 41,560). Data were obtained by linking several health electronic records of the Valencia region, Spain. Incidence rates were estimated. We used the inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox analysis to control for indication bias when assessing the risk of effectiveness and safety outcomes for each NOAC compared with acenocoumarol. Several sensitivity analyses were performed.
We did not find differences in the risk of mortality, ischaemic stroke or any gastrointestinal bleeding. However, we did find a decreased risk of intracranial haemorrhage for dabigatran (HR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.20–0.56) and rivaroxaban (HR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.35–0.85) as compared to acenocoumarol. In subanalyses, apixaban showed a higher risk of ischaemic stroke in high‐risk persons (≥75 years and CHA2DS2‐VASC score ≥ 2).
No differences in clinical outcomes were found between NOAC and acenocoumarol overall, although dabigatran and rivaroxaban showed a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Findings on the potential inferiority of specific NOAC in high‐risk subgroups should be studied further.
Understanding the association between metformin plasma concentrations and lactate
The problem of look‐alike, sound‐alike name errors: Drivers and solutions