The use of novel anticoagulants such as dabigatran are increasing. Despite increased risks of intracerebral haemorrhage with warfarin among Asians, there is little published data on dabigatran to assess 'real world' efficacy and safety of dabigatran therapy in Asia. This was a retrospective observational study of patients prescribed dabigatran between 2010 and 2013. Data was available for 510 patients: median age 68 years (range 20-91), median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 2 and median HAS-BLED score was 2. The average follow-up duration of 315 days (range: 1-1,096). The overall discontinuation rate was 16% after a median 252 days of treatment with dabigatran. There were 17 (3.3%) patients with minor bleeding, 2 (0.4%) had major bleeding episodes. 20 patients (3.9%) developed dyspepsia which was the most common side effect. The rate of occurrences of adverse effects and bleeding were lower than those seen in the RE-LY trial. None of the patients had an ischaemic stroke, 1 (0.2%) patient had a haemorrhagic stroke. Out of 510 patients, 158 patients (31%) were switched to dabigatran from warfarin. This showed that patients frequently preferred the dabigatran due to convenience when given a choice to switch from warfarin. We report one of the largest registry of Asian patients. Reassuringly, we found that our cohort had a low rate of rate of ischaemic stroke, low rates of side effects and bleeding with the drug.
The aim of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in the pain indicators and effectiveness between venipuncture (VP) and heel prick (HP) for blood glucose monitoring in term neonates (recently, venipuncture was shown superior for the Guthrie test).
BACKGROUND: The Asian population with atrial fibrillation (AF) have a higher risk of stroke than the caucasian population and a higher risk of intracranial bleeding when anticoagulated with warfarin. There are few real-world studies comparing the efficacy of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin among Asian patients to assess its outcomes of ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 1000 patients on dabigatran and warfarin from 2009 to 2013.
RESULTS: Data were available for 500 patients on dabigatran and 500 patients on warfarin. The average follow-up duration was 315 ± 280 days in the dabigatran group and 355 ± 232 in the warfarin group. The time in therapeutic range (TTR) was 53.2% in the warfarin-treated group, with 32.8% of patients in the subtherapeutic international normalized ratio range of <2. None of the patients in the dabigatran group had ischemic cerebrovascular accident (CVA) compared to 4 (0.8%) patients in the warfarin group, hazard ratio (HR) 0.13, P = .3. There was 1 (0.2%) patient in both dabigatran and warfarin groups with hemorrhagic CVA (HR 1.16, P = .92). There were 3 (0.6%) patients with major bleeding in the dabigatran group compared to 2 (0.4%) patients in the warfarin group (HR 1.57, P = .59).
CONCLUSION: There were similar rates of efficacy for outcomes of ischemic CVA, hemorrhagic CVA, and bleeding when comparing dabigatran with warfarin. Our study shows that despite similar efficacy, suboptimal TTR rates and inconveniences with warfarin demonstrate that NOACs are preferred for stroke prevention in AF.
KEYWORDS: dabigatran; non-valvular atrial fibrillation; novel anticoagulant; stroke prevention; warfarin