+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Apixaban, Rivaroxaban, and Dabigatran in Patients Undergoing Atrial Fibrillation Ablation



Apixaban, Rivaroxaban, and Dabigatran in Patients Undergoing Atrial Fibrillation Ablation



Journal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology 27(2): 147-153



Data on the novel oral anticoagulants (NOACS) during catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) are still limited. This study evaluated the periprocedural major complications (MC) of CA of AF, and compared Apixaban, Dabigatran, and Rivaroxaban with continuous phenoprocoumon. A total of 444 patients (mean age = 65.1 ± 9.4 years; 283 [64%] male) with paroxysmal (n = 180 [41%]), persistent (n = 256 [58%]), or longstanding-persistent AF were enrolled. CA was performed in all patients using radiofrequency energy in conjunction with a 3D-mapping system. MCs were defined according to the current guidelines. Continuous phenprocoumon-therapy was administered in 120/444 (27%) patients (group 1) and 324/444 (73%) patients were treated with NOACs (group 2; Dabigatran: n = 51 [15.7%]; Rivaroxaban: n = 193 [59.6%]; Apixaban: n = 80 [24.7%]). Procedure times were comparable between groups 1 and 2 (128.2 ± 39.7 minutes vs. 129.7 ± 51.2 minutes; P = 0.77). CHA2 DS2-Vasc (3.0 [2.0, 4.0)] vs. 2.0 [1.0, 3.0]; P < 0.01) and HASBLED scores (2.0 [2.0, 2.5] vs. 2.0 [1.0, 2.0]; P = 0.002) were higher in group 1 patients. The incidence of MCs in the overall group was 8/444 (2%) and was equally distributed between groups 1 and 2 (2/120 [2%] vs. 6/324 [2%], P = 0.90). The incidence of MCs was comparable between the three different NOACs. There were no significant differences between patients with and without MCs with regard to age, CHA2 DS2-Vasc-score or HASBLED-score. The major complication rate between all three NOACs currently available and continuous phenprocoumon during AF ablation seem to be comparable. Complication rates were similar between patients treated with the three different available NOACs.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057219293

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 26464027

DOI: 10.1111/jce.12856


Related references

Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran use in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation using the second-generation cryoballoon. Clinical Cardiology 40(11): 1095-1099, 2017

Left atrial thrombus and dense spontaneous echocardiographic contrast in patients on continuous direct oral anticoagulant therapy undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: Comparison of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. Heart Rhythm 15(4): 496-502, 2018

Rivaroxaban and dabigatran in patients undergoing catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. Europace 16(8): 1137-1144, 2014

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin or dabigatran in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Cardiology 185: 209-213, 2015

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin or dabigatran in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. American Journal of Cardiology 114(4): 577-582, 2014

Comparative effectiveness and safety of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. International Journal of Cardiology 268: 113-119, 2018

Dabigatran but not rivaroxaban or apixaban treatment decreases fibrinolytic resistance in patients with atrial fibrillation. Thrombosis Research 138: 22-29, 2016

Apixaban may have lower risk of GI bleeding compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. Evidence-Based Medicine 22(4): 154-155, 2017

Comparative Effectiveness of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, Apixaban, and Warfarin in the Management of Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 94(2): 269-276, 2013

Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, and Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Frail Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation. Journal of the American Heart Association 7(8):, 2018

Comparison of cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation with dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across countries. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 37(4): 507-523, 2014

Comparison of efficacy and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation using network meta-analysis. International Angiology 31(4): 330-339, 2012

Major Bleeding Risk During Anticoagulation with Warfarin, Dabigatran, Apixaban, or Rivaroxaban in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation. Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy 23(9): 968-978, 2017

A head-to-head comparison of periprocedural coagulability under anticoagulation with rivaroxaban versus dabigatran in patients undergoing ablation of atrial fibrillation. Clinical Drug Investigation 33(11): 847-853, 2013

Real-world comparison of bleeding risks among non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients prescribed apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban. Plos one 13(11): E0205989, 2018