RESUMEN

There is limited contemporary prospective real-world evidence of patients with chronic arterial disease in Latin America. The Network to control atherothrombosis (NEAT) registry is a national prospective observational study of patients with known coronary (CAD) and/or peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in Brazil. A total of 2,005 patients were enrolled among 25 sites from September 2020 to March 2022. Patient characteristics, medications and laboratorial data were collected. Primary objective was to assess the proportion of patients who, at the initial visit, were in accordance with good medical practices (domains) for reducing cardiovascular risk in atherothrombotic disease. From the total of patients enrolled, 2 were excluded since they did not meet eligibility criteria. Among the 2,003 subjects included in the analysis, 55.6% had isolated CAD, 28.7% exclusive PAD and 15.7% had both diagnoses. Overall mean age was 66.3 (± 10.5) years and 65.7% were male patients. Regarding evidence-based therapies (EBTs), 4% were not using any antithrombotic drug and only 1.5% were using vascular dose of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg bid). Only 0.3% of the patients satisfied all the domains of secondary prevention, including prescription of EBTs and targets of body-mass index, blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, and adherence of lifestyle recommendations. The main barrier for prescription of EBTs was medical judgement. Our findings highlight that the contemporary practice does not reflect a comprehensive approach for secondary prevention and had very low incorporation of new therapies in Brazil. Large-scale populational interventions addressing these gaps are warranted to improve the use of evidence-based therapies and reduce the burden of atherothrombotic disease.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04677725.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to assess the treatment options for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) based on the most robust level of evidence recommendations and suggestions based on expert opinion. RECENT FINDINGS: Several classes of anticoagulants have been studied in the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). Since the CLOT trial, guidelines recommend the use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for the treatment of this condition. However, since 2018, some direct oral anticoagulants became an alternative first-line treatment for CAT. Three Xa antagonists (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) proved to be at least as effective as the LMWH strategy for the short-term prevention of VTE recurrence. The right choice of treatment in the context of anticoagulation strategy, thrombo-hemorrhagic risk management, and a patient's comorbidities represents a challenge. The correct management of CAT and a more individualized approach are needed to identify risk factors and offer the best treatment for each patient.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Direct oral anticoagulants have been an increasingly used class of drugs in the setting of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, defying vitamin K antagonists' monopoly when it comes to anticoagulation due to its several limitations. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have entered the market as a noninferior and safer option in comparison with vitamin K antagonists, as their respective phase III clinical trials proved. The aim of this article was to update and summarize data on their clinical pharmacology and to review real-world data to know their comparative effectiveness and safety. We performed a systematic review using PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Web of Science as search engines. Regarding pharmacodynamics, there were no substantial changes reported from their original profile. There were many advances in the knowledge about clinical pharmacokinetics of DOACs that have had a direct impact on their clinical use, mainly related to drug-drug interactions. In a real-world setting, DOACs have shown to be noninferior in preventing thromboembolic events compared to vitamin K antagonists. In regards to safety, DOACs have shown a lower bleeding risk relative to warfarin. Comparison between DOACs has demonstrated rivaroxaban to have the highest bleeding risk. Overall, the evidence gathered showed few changes from the original data presented in phase III clinical trials, concluding that their real-world use coincides greatly with them.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention after major gynecological cancer surgery might be an alternative to parenteral low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Patients undergoing major gynecological cancer surgery were randomized at hospital discharge to receive rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily or enoxaparin 40 mg once daily for 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a combination of symptomatic VTE and VTE-related death or asymptomatic VTE at day 30. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Two hundred and twenty-eight patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban (n = 114)or enoxaparin (n = 114). The trial was stopped due to a lower-than-expected event rate. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 3.51% of patients assigned to rivaroxaban and in 4.39% of patients assigned to enoxaparin (relative risk 0.80, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.90; p = 0.7344). Patients assigned to rivaroxaban had no primary bleeding event, and 3 patients (2.63%) in the enoxaparin group had a major or CRNM bleeding event (hazard ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.007 to 2.73; P = 0.1963). In patients undergoing major gynecological cancer surgery, thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban 10 mg daily for 30 days had similar rates of thrombotic and bleeding events compared to parenteral enoxaparin 40 mg daily. While the power is limited due to not reaching the intended sample size, our results support the hypothesis that DOACs might be an attractive alternative strategy to LMWH to prevent VTE in this high-risk population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Abstract Objective Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid, ASA) and rivaroxaban are anticoagulants that have increased in popularity due to ease of use in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ASA compared with that of rivaroxaban on VTE prophylaxis in patients who underwent TKA. Method Forty patients who had primary knee osteoarthritis and would undergo TKA were randomized into two groups. In total, 20 patients in the ASA group used oral aspirin, at a dose of 300 mg/day, for VTE prophylaxis after TKA, while 20 patients in the rivaroxaban group received oral rivaroxaban, at a dose of 10 mg/day. On days 4 and 14 after the operation, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the lower limbs on the operated side was detected through duplex ultrasonography. Other complications were recorded for 14 days. Results There were no positive findings of DVT detected with duplex ultrasonography in the groups of patients, and the occurrence of pulmonary embolism was not observed. In total, 4 patients had subcutaneous ecchymosis on the fourth postoperative day (2 patients in the ASA group and 2 patients in the rivaroxaban group; p= 1.0), and another 4 patients on the fourteenth postoperative day (1 patient in the ASA group and 3 patients in the rivaroxaban group; p= 0.292). No cases of wound hematoma, major organ bleeding, wound infection, or reoperation were observed in the sample. Conclusion Aspirin and rivaroxaban had comparable efficacy to prevent VTE, without increasing the incidence of wound complications and bleeding after TKA.

Resumo Objetivo A aspirina (ácido acetilsalicílico, AAS) e a rivaroxabana são anticoagulantes que vêm ganhando popularidade devido à facilidade de uso na prevenção do tromboembolismo venoso (TEV) após artroplastia total do joelho (ATJ). Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a eficácia do AAS em comparação com a da rivaroxabana na profilaxia de TEV em pacientes submetidos a ATJ. Método Quarenta pacientes com osteoartrite primária do joelho, que seriam submetidos a ATJ, foram randomizados em dois grupos. No total, 20 pacientes do grupo AAS usaram aspirina oral, na dose de 300 mg/dia, para a profilaxia do TEV após ATJ; e 20 pacientes do grupo rivaroxabana receberam uma dose oral de 10 mg/dia. No 4° e 14° dias do pós-operatório, trombose venosa profunda (TVP) dos membros inferiores no lado da cirurgia foi detectada por meio de ultrassonografia duplex. Foram registradas outras complicações durante catorze dias. Resultados Não foram detectados achados positivos de TVP com a ultrassonografia duplex nos grupos de pacientes, e não se observou a ocorrência de embolia pulmonar. No total, 4 pacientes apresentaram equimose subcutânea no 4° dia do pós-operatório (2 pacientes no grupo AAS e 2 pacientes no grupo rivaroxabana; p= 1,0), e outros 4 pacientes, no 14° dia do pós-operatório (1 paciente no grupo AAS e 3 pacientes no grupo rivaroxabana; p= 0,292). Nenhum paciente da amostra apresentou hematoma da ferida cirúrgica, sangramento de órgão importante, infecção da ferida, ou necessidade de nova cirurgia. Conclusão A aspirina e a rivaroxabana apresentaram eficácia comparável na prevenção do TEV, sem aumentar a incidência de complicações da ferida e sangramento após ATJ.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious national and international public health issue. Major orthopedic surgeries, such as a total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties, are associated with an increased risk of VTE, long-term complications, functional disability, and death resulting from hypercoagulability by surgical trauma. This pharmacoeconomic analysis aimed to identify the most cost-effective anticoagulant alternative in preventing VTE in patients undergoing THA and TKA. METHODS: A decision tree model was developed, comparing direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and dabigatran) with enoxaparin, with separate THA and TKA models a 3-month time horizon from the perspective of the Brazilian National Health System. The results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and the outcomes analyzed were avoided complications (ACs) after thromboprophylaxis. Comparative effectiveness was obtained from a published meta-analysis. A willingness to pay value of approximately R$ 15 000.00 was used per AC, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis with the Monte Carlo simulation was conducted. RESULTS: Apixaban was the anticoagulant that presented the best ICER for patients undergoing THA (R$ 207.52/AC) and TKA (R$ 133.59/AC), followed by rivaroxaban (R$ 347.21/AC), dabigatran (R$ 372.56/AC), and enoxaparin (R$ 711.44/AC) for THA and by dabigatran (R$ 194.07/AC), rivaroxaban (R$ 221.12/AC), and enoxaparin (R$ 747.25/AC) for TKA. After ICER analysis, apixaban prevails over the other technologies analyzed for both surgical procedures, confirmed after sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that, in the Brazilian National Health System, apixaban is the most cost-effective alternative in preventing VTE after THA and TKA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Obesity, a chronic disease established as a global epidemic by the World Health Organization, is considered a risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, which has high morbidity and mortality. Although both obesity and AF are diseases associated with negative outcomes, studies have shown the presence of an obesity paradox, in which patients with a high body mass index (BMI) and AF have a better prognosis than patients with a normal BMI. Despite the fact that the mechanisms that lead to this paradox are still uncertain, adequate anticoagulation in obese patients seems to play an important role in reducing adverse events in this group. In this perspective article, the authors discuss the relationship between new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), namely, apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban (factor Xa inhibitors) and dabigatran (direct inhibitor of thrombin), and the obesity paradox, seeking to deepen the understanding of the mechanism that leads to this paradox.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Rheumatic valve disease is present in 0.4 % of the word population, mainly in lowincome countries. Rheumatic mitral stenosis affects more women and between 40 to 75 % of patients may have atrial fibrillation (AF), more frequently in upper-middle income countries. This rhythm disturbance is due to increased atrial pressure, chronic inflammation, fibrosis, and left atrial enlargement. There is also an increase in the prevalence of AF with age in patients with mitral stenosis. The risk of stroke is 4 % per year. Success rates for cardioversion, Cox-Maze procedure, and catheter ablation are low. Therefore, anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonist is mandatory for Evaluated Heart valves, Rheumatic or Artificial (EHRA) classification type 1. However, this anticoagulation is used by less than 80 % of those eligible and less than 30 % have the international normalized ratio in the therapeutic range. The safety and efficacy of using rivaroxaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor anticoagulant, were demonstrated in the RIVER trial with a sample of 1005 patients with AF and bioprosthetic mitral valve. The indication for valve replacement, that is, if severe mitral stenosis or severe mitral regurgitation, was not specified. A randomized, open-label study (DAVID-MS) is underway to compare the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran and warfarin therapy for stroke prevention in patients with AF and moderate or severe mitral stenosis. Thus, the applicability of the use of direct anticoagulants in patients with AF and mitral stenosis and also in those undergoing mitral bioprostheses surgery will be the subject of further studies. The findings may explain if specific atrial changes of mitral stenosis even after the valve replacement will influence thromboembolic events with direct anticoagulants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Severely injured patients are at particularly high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Although thromboprophylaxis (PPX) is employed during the inpatient period, patients may continue to be at high risk after discharge. Comparative evidence from surgical subspecialities (eg oncology) reveals benefits of postdischarge (ie extended) PPX. We hypothesized that an extended, postinjury oral thromboprophylaxis regimen would be cost-effective. STUDY DESIGN: A cost-utility model compared no PPX with a 30-day course of apixaban, dabigatran, enoxaparin, fondaparinux, or rivaroxaban in trauma patients. Immediate events including deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolus, or bleeding within 30 days of injury were modeled in a decision tree with patients entering a Markov process to account for sequelae of VTE, including postthrombotic syndrome and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to identify conditions under which the preferred PPX strategy changed. RESULTS: Rivaroxaban was the dominant strategy (ie less costly and more effective) compared with no PPX or alternative regimens, delivering 30.21 quality-adjusted life years for $404,546.38. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated robust preference for rivaroxaban. When examining only patients with moderate-high or high VTE Risk Assessment Profile scores, rivaroxaban remained the preferred strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated a preference for rivaroxaban in 100% of cases at a standard willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSIONS: A 30-day course of rivaroxaban is a cost-effective extended thromboprophylaxis strategy in trauma patients in this theoretical study. Prospective studies of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis to prevent postinjury VTE are warranted.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS trial demonstrated that in patients with peripheral arterial disease, the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin reduces the risk of major adverse limb events, but it is not known whether this combination can also improve symptoms in patients with intermittent claudication. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of the combination on claudication distance. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty-eight patients with intermittent claudication will be randomized to receive rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 24 weeks. The primary outcome is the change in claudication distance from the baseline to 24 weeks, measured by 6 min walking test and treadmill test. The primary safety outcome is the incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The COMPASS CLAUDICATION trial will provide high-quality evidence regarding the effect of the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin on claudication distance in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state leading to adverse clinical outcomes. Whether therapeutic anticoagulation improves outcomes in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 is unknown. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of therapeutic versus prophylactic anticoagulation in this population. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, open-label (with blinded adjudication), multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, at 31 sites in Brazil. Patients (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, and who had COVID-19 symptoms for up to 14 days before randomisation, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation. Therapeutic anticoagulation was in-hospital oral rivaroxaban (20 mg or 15 mg daily) for stable patients, or initial subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice per day) or intravenous unfractionated heparin (to achieve a 0·3-0·7 IU/mL anti-Xa concentration) for clinically unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban to day 30. Prophylactic anticoagulation was standard in-hospital enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. The primary efficacy outcome was a hierarchical analysis of time to death, duration of hospitalisation, or duration of supplemental oxygen to day 30, analysed with the win ratio method (a ratio >1 reflects a better outcome in the therapeutic anticoagulation group) in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding through 30 days. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04394377) and is completed. FINDINGS: From June 24, 2020, to Feb 26, 2021, 3331 patients were screened and 615 were randomly allocated (311 [50%] to the therapeutic anticoagulation group and 304 [50%] to the prophylactic anticoagulation group). 576 (94%) were clinically stable and 39 (6%) clinically unstable. One patient, in the therapeutic group, was lost to follow-up because of withdrawal of consent and was not included in the primary analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was not different between patients assigned therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation, with 28 899 (34·8%) wins in the therapeutic group and 34 288 (41·3%) in the prophylactic group (win ratio 0·86 [95% CI 0·59-1·22], p=0·40). Consistent results were seen in clinically stable and clinically unstable patients. The primary safety outcome of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding occurred in 26 (8%) patients assigned therapeutic anticoagulation and seven (2%) assigned prophylactic anticoagulation (relative risk 3·64 [95% CI 1·61-8·27], p=0·0010). Allergic reaction to the study medication occurred in two (1%) patients in the therapeutic anticoagulation group and three (1%) in the prophylactic anticoagulation group. INTERPRETATION: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer concentration, in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin followed by rivaroxaban to day 30 did not improve clinical outcomes and increased bleeding compared with prophylactic anticoagulation. Therefore, use of therapeutic-dose rivaroxaban, and other direct oral anticoagulants, should be avoided in these patients in the absence of an evidence-based indication for oral anticoagulation. FUNDING: Coalition COVID-19 Brazil, Bayer SA.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a genetic syndrome which typically presents with neurological manifestations. Some of the patients may also present with vasculopathies, among which arterial aneurysms and stenosis are the most common. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has rarely been described, and, to the best of our knowledge, the present is the first report of DVT due to venous compression by a neurofibroma in the setting of NF1. This is the case of a 23-year-old male with NF1 who experienced DVT due to compression of the left posterior tibial veins by a large tumor arising from the tibial nerve. The DVT was acutely treated with enoxaparin and then with rivaroxaban. Two months after the diagnosis, Doppler ultrasonography showed partial recanalization and persistence of the DVT. The patient was then referred to neurosurgery for surgical resection of the tumor. There were no complications during the procedure, and the patient did not present postoperative neurological deficits. The final histopathological diagnosis was of a benign neurofibroma. After one year of follow-up with vascular surgery, the patient presented no more episodes of DVT. In case there is a tumor compressing the deep vessels of the leg and promoting DVT, surgical resection with microsurgical techniques may be curative.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have suggested a higher risk of thrombotic events in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Moreover, elevated D-dimer levels have been identified as an important prognostic marker in COVID-19 directly associated with disease severity and progression. Prophylactic anticoagulation for hospitalized COVID-19 patients might not be enough to prevent thrombotic events; therefore, therapeutic anticoagulation regimens deserve clinical investigation. DESIGN: ACTION is an academic-led, pragmatic, multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase IV clinical trial that aims to enroll around 600 patients at 40 sites participating in the Coalition COVID-19 Brazil initiative. Eligible patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 with symptoms up to 14 days and elevated D-dimer levels will be randomized to a strategy of full-dose anticoagulation for 30 days with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (or full-dose heparin if oral administration is not feasible) vs standard of care with any approved venous thromboembolism prophylaxis regimen during hospitalization. A confirmation of COVID-19 was mandatory for study entry, based on specific tests used in clinical practice (RT-PCR, antigen test, IgM test) collected before randomization, regardless of in the outpatient setting or not. Randomization will be stratified by clinical stability at presentation. The primary outcome is a hierarchical analysis of mortality, length of hospital stay, or duration of oxygen therapy at the end of 30 days. Secondary outcomes include the World Health Organization's 8-point ordinal scale at 30 days and the following efficacy outcomes: incidence of venous thromboembolism , acute myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, major adverse limb events, duration of oxygen therapy, disease progression, and biomarkers. The primary safety outcomes are major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. SUMMARY: The ACTION trial will evaluate whether in-hospital therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban for stable patients, or enoxaparin for unstable patients, followed by rivaroxaban through 30 days compared with standard prophylactic anticoagulation improves clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer levels.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCCIÓN: La fibrilación auricular (FA) representa un importante problema socio-sanitario, siendo la arritmia cardíaca más frecuente en la práctica clínica con una prevalencia actual del 1 al 2% de la población, y donde la FA no asociada a valvulopatías (FANV) es la forma más frecuente. Esta patología favorece la formación de trombos, cuyas complicaciones más severas son el tromboembolismo arterial periférico, el accidente cerebrovascular (ACV) isquémico, la insuficiência cardiaca (IC) y la muerte. El tratamiento con anticoagulantes antagonistas de la vitamina K (AVK) reduce el riesgo de eventos tromboembólicos, sin embargo, estos tienen una eficacia limitada y requieren controles hematológicos estrictos debido a que una proporción elevada de pacientes no se encuentren en rango óptimo de anticoagulación, siendo el tiempo en rango promedio en Argentina de 66,6% (IC 95%: 54 a 80%). El grupo terapéutico de anticoagulantes orales directos (ACODs), que no requieren de controles hematológicos tan estrictos y poseen rangos terapéuticos más estables, se postulan que serían tan o más efectivos que los AVK en la prevención de eventos tromboembólicos en pacientes FANV y podrían presentar un mejor perfil de seguridad en relación a la incidencia de sangrados asociados a la anticoagulación. OBJETIVO: El objetivo del presente informe es evaluar la evidencia disponible acerca de la eficacia, seguridad y aspectos relacionados a las guías de práctica clínica, políticas de cobertura y económicos del uso de ACODs (apixabán, dabigatrán, rivaroxabán) para pacientes con FANV. METODOLOGIÍA: Como resultado se incluyeron cuatro revisiones sistemáticas con metaanálisis, diez guías de práctica clínica, once políticas de cobertura, una revisión sistemática de evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias, diecisiete estudios de costo-efectividad, y se realizó un análisis de impacto presupuestario (AIP). RESULTADOS: Los resultados sobre eficacia y seguridad basados en ensayos clínicos, y validados en estudios de la vida real, han demostrado que ACODs tienen eficacia similar y un mejor perfil de seguridad que los AVK, debido principalmente al menor riesgo de complicaciones hemorrágicas. Por estos motivos las guías de práctica clínica de las principales sociedades científicas internacionales relevadas (Europa, Estados Unidos, Canadá, Australia, Nueva Zelanda) posicionan a los ACODs como de primera elección frente a los AVK para pacientes con FANV. En relación a la evidencia económica relevada, los países de altos ingresos (Estados Unidos, Europa y Asia) reportan que los ACODs son estrategias costo-efectivas para los umbrales propuestos para cada país. Em América Latina, estudios económicos provenientes de Brasil y Colombia, evidencian resultados dispares especialmente como consecuencia de los costos de adquisición de los ACODs. En Argentina, los estúdios de costo-efectividad de apixabán y dabigatrán frente a AVK (warfarina) los consideran alternativas costoefectivas mientras que el AIP de elaboración propia estima que la incorporación de los ACODs, tanto en primera línea de tratamiento cómo en pacientes refractarios fuera de rango de anticoagulación, generaría un alto impacto presupuestario al sistema de salud argentino, principalmente debido a los elevados precios de adquisición de los ACODs en relación al acenocumarol. Los países de altos ingresos en general brindan cobertura pero existe disparidad entre sí es para primera línea de tratamiento o para pacientes fuera de rango de anticoagulación con AVK. En América Latina, los financiadores de salud relevados no cubren los ACODs para ninguna de las indicaciones evaluadas, mientras que en Colombia y Brasil fueron rechazados explícitamente por el alto costo según estúdios locales. CONCLUSIONES: Apixabán, dabigatrán y rivaroxabán presentan beneficios marcados en la mortalidad y algún grado de beneficio en la prevención de ACV isquémico e infarto de miocardio y presentan menos incidencia de sangrados intracraneales (y en algunos casos también menos sangrados mayores) en comparación con warfarina. Dependiendo del resultado de salud evaluado, varía el grado de certeza de la evidencia. Respecto a políticas de cobertura, los países de altos ingresos relevados brindan cobertura pero varían si es para primera línea de tratamiento o para pacientes fuera de rango de anticoagulación con AVK. En América Latina, los financiadores de salud identificados no cubren los ACODs para ninguna de las indicaciones; mientras que en Colombia y Brasil la cobertura fue rechazada explícitamente por el alto costo de los fármacos, en base a estudios locales.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)