Background 2 years after obtaining marketing authorisation for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), the new oral anticoagulants (NOAs) are trying to establish their market position against the Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs).
Purpose To compare the side effects, in particular bleeding, of the NOAs versus VKAs in the treatment of AF in hospitalised patients.
Material and methods 100 cases of hospitalised patients treated by oral anticoagulants (50 VKAs, 50 NOAs) were analysed using an assessment table (Table 1). An interview with the patient and with his doctor, assessing his compliance, completed the observation. The data were then entered for statistical processing by Sphinx.
Conclusion This study shows that patients treated for AF with VKAs/NOAs appear to have the same risk of haemorrhage. These results correlate with those obtained by the RELY and ROCKET studies,1 while our population was more at risk (CHADS2-VASc was higher). Population treated for AF was an elderly population, polymedicated, with many risk factors. It is pertinent to validate the anticoagulation by AVK, except for patients whose INR is unstable, where NOA becomes a real therapeutic alternative. The question of first-line use of an NOA in the Hospital is increasingly discussed for polymedicated elderly patients, all the more since VKAs are less easy to use in term of drug interactions, compliance and stability of INR.
RELY and ROCKET studies
ReferenceNo conflict of interest.