| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Eriksson, Bengt I., 1946, et al.
(author)
-
Concomitant use of medication with antiplatelet effects in patients receiving either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin after total hip or knee arthroplasty.
- 2012
-
In: Thrombosis research. - : Elsevier BV. - 1879-2472 .- 0049-3848. ; 130:2, s. 147-151
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: The RECORD programme compared oral rivaroxaban with enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after elective total hip or knee replacement. This analysis compared the safety of concomitant use of specified medications with rivaroxaban and enoxaparin by evaluating postoperative bleeding rates from the pooled RECORD1-4 data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The co-medications were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and platelet function inhibitors, including acetylsalicylic acid (no dose restriction). The endpoints evaluated were the composite of major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding and any bleeding occurring after first oral study drug intake. The time relative to surgery was stratified into three time periods: day 1-3, day 4-7 and after day 7. Relative bleeding rate ratios for co-medication use versus non-use were derived using stratified Mantel-Haenszel methods and compared between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin groups. RESULTS: Co-medication use with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin resulted in non-significant increases in bleeding events. Respective rate ratios were not significantly different between rivaroxaban and enoxaparin for all bleeding endpoints with concomitant use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (any bleeding, 1.22 vs 1.22; major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, 1.28 vs 0.90) and with concomitant use of platelet function inhibitors/acetylsalicylic acid (any bleeding, 1.32 vs 1.40; major and non-major clinically relevant bleeding, 1.11 vs 1.13). CONCLUSIONS: This explorative analysis indicates that there is no significant increase in bleeding risk for rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin when co-administered with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetylsalicylic acid, although, because of low usage, the experience with platelet function inhibitors (except acetylsalicylic acid) was limited.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Eriksson, Bengt I., 1946, et al.
(author)
-
Efficacy of delayed thromboprophylaxis with dabigatran: Pooled analysis.
- 2012
-
In: Thrombosis research. - : Elsevier BV. - 1879-2472 .- 0049-3848. ; 130:6, s. 871-876
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Oral thromboprophylaxis with dabigatran etexilate should be initiated as a half dose 1 to 4h after major orthopaedic surgery. However, a delay in dosing could occur for clinical or logistical reasons. A post hoc analysis was carried out to determine if patients with delayed dosing received adequate anticoagulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The RE-MODEL™ and RE-NOVATE® trials compared 220mg and 150mg dabigatran etexilate with 40mg enoxaparin. Pooled data for major venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related mortality (efficacy outcome) and major bleeding events (MBE), MBE/clinically relevant bleeding events, and all bleeding events (safety outcomes) were analysed. Results in patients with dosing delayed more than 4h postsurgery were compared with those of patients without a delay. RESULTS: Onset of treatment was delayed in 724 (13.3%) of 5425 patients. Efficacy of 220mg dabigatran etexilate was similar in patients without delayed dosing, patients with a delay and patients with a delay until the day after surgery. Rates of efficacy outcome were higher in patients on 150mg dabigatran etexilate, but more than 80% of these patients were undertreated based on age or renal clearance status. Some differences in bleeding events were seen among patient groups by treatment arm. CONCLUSION: Dabigatran etexilate thromboprophylaxis should be initiated 1 to 4h postsurgery. Results from our post-hoc analysis indicate that no loss of efficacy appears to occur if initiation of dabigatran etexilate 220mg needs to be delayed.
|
|
| 5. |
- Lassen, Michael R, et al.
(author)
-
Rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total knee arthroplasty
- 2008
-
In: The New England journal of medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 358:26, s. 86-2776
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of rivaroxaban, an orally active direct factor Xa inhibitor, in preventing venous thrombosis after total knee arthroplasty.METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, 2531 patients who were to undergo total knee arthroplasty received either oral rivaroxaban, 10 mg once daily, beginning 6 to 8 hours after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin, 40 mg once daily, beginning 12 hours before surgery. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of any deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause within 13 to 17 days after surgery. Secondary efficacy outcomes included major venous thromboembolism (i.e., proximal deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death related to venous thromboembolism) and symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding.RESULTS: The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 79 of 824 patients (9.6%) who received rivaroxaban and in 166 of 878 (18.9%) who received enoxaparin (absolute risk reduction, 9.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9 to 12.4; P<0.001). Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 9 of 908 patients (1.0%) given rivaroxaban and 24 of 925 (2.6%) given enoxaparin (absolute risk reduction, 1.6%; 95% CI, 0.4 to 2.8; P=0.01). Symptomatic events occurred less frequently with rivaroxaban than with enoxaparin (P=0.005). Major bleeding occurred in 0.6% of patients in the rivaroxaban group and 0.5% of patients in the enoxaparin group. The incidence of drug-related adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, was 12.0% in the rivaroxaban group and 13.0% in the enoxaparin group.CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban was superior to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total knee arthroplasty, with similar rates of bleeding. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00361894.)
|
|
| 6. |
- Rosencher, Nadia, et al.
(author)
-
Type of anaesthesia and the safety and efficacy of thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin or dabigatran etexilate in major orthopaedic surgery: pooled analysis of three randomized controlled trials.
- 2012
-
In: Thrombosis journal. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1477-9560. ; 10:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- ABSTRACT: Background: There has been a shift towards greater use of neuraxial over general anaesthesia for patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty. Furthermore, suggestions that peripheral nerve block may reduce adverse effects have recently been put forward. Although older studies showed a reduction in venous thromboembolism (VTE) with neuraxial compared with general anaesthesia, this difference has not been confirmed in studies using effective current thromboprophylaxis. We used a large data set to investigate the pattern of anaesthesia usage, and whether anaesthesia type affects efficacy and bleeding outcomes of thromboprophylaxis overall, within each treatment group, or for the novel oral anticoagulant dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin. Methods: Three previously reported trials compared 220 mg and 150 mg dabigatran etexilate once daily with enoxaparin after knee or hip arthroplasty. A pooled analysis was performed in patients receiving general or neuraxial anaesthesia, or the combination of either with peripheral nerve block (n = 8062). Outcome measures were major VTE plus VTE-related mortality, major bleeding and major plus clinically relevant bleeding events. Results: General, neuraxial and combination anaesthesia were used in 29%, 52% and 19% of patients, respectively. Differences in efficacy and safety between anaesthesia subgroups were small and not significant, except for a slightly higher rate of major VTE and VTE-related mortality with general versus neuraxial anaesthesia (odds ratio: 1.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.03–1.90; p = 0.035) in the overall population. There were no significant effects of anaesthesia type on efficacy or safety of dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin. Conclusions: Anaesthesia type did not greatly affect efficacy and safety outcomes in the pooled population of all three treatment groups. The efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate was comparable with enoxaparin, regardless of type of anaesthesia. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00168805, NCT00168818, NCT00152971.
|
|
