Direct oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin for left ventricular thrombus
Research article published in European heart journal open (2026)
Abstract
AIMS: Left ventricular (LV) thrombus carries a high risk of death and systemic embolism. While warfarin has been the standard treatment, evidence comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with warfarin in this setting remains limited. This study aimed to compare real-world, risk-adjusted outcomes of DOAC vs. warfarin use in patients with LV thrombus. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the TriNetX research network database. Adults (≥18 years) with echocardiographically confirmed LV thrombus from 2016 to 2022 were included. Patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter, venous thromboembolism, end-stage renal disease, mechanical/bioprosthetic valves, or therapy switch during follow-up were excluded. Propensity score matching (1:1) was used to balance covariates. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and stroke/transient ischaemic attack at 30 days and 1 year. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding and LV thrombus resolution. Of 2488 eligible patients (DOAC: 950; warfarin: 1538), 945 matched pairs were analysed with all baseline covariates balanced. In the DOAC group, 74% received apixaban and 26% rivaroxaban. At 30 days and 1 year, the composite outcome did not differ significantly between DOAC and warfarin [13.3% vs. 15%; matched hazard ratio (HR): 0.90, P = 0.41, and 23.8% vs. 26.7%; matched HR: 0.93, P = 0.46, respectively]. Major bleeding rates were similar at 30 days and 1 year (1.18% vs. 1.54%; matched HR: 0.77, P = 0.54, and 4.8% vs. 4.7%; matched HR: 1.13, P = 0.58, respectively). Thrombus resolution at 6 months occurred in ∼81% of patients with follow-up imaging, with no difference by treatment group. CONCLUSION: In a large propensity-matched cohort, DOACs and warfarin demonstrated comparable effectiveness and safety for LV thrombus management, supporting DOACs as a reasonable alternative.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Resumen
Peer-reviewed clinical and outcomes research relevant to medicinal leech therapy and its biology. Indexed in PubMed and verified against the NCBI record.
Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia
Este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo emparejado por propensión, extraído de la red TriNetX, comparó los anticoagulantes orales directos (DOAC) con warfarin en 945 pares emparejados de pacientes con trombo del ventrículo izquierdo confirmado ecocardiográficamente y no encontró diferencias significativas en el compuesto de mortalidad más accidente cerebrovascular/AIT a los 30 días o 1 año, tasas de hemorragia mayor similares y una resolución del trombo comparable (~81%) a los 6 meses, concluyendo que los DOAC son una alternativa razonable a warfarin en este contexto. Para el panorama de la evidencia de la hirudoterapia, proporciona un contexto útil sobre el panorama moderno de la anticoagulación sistémica que enmarca cómo se posicionan los anticoagulantes derivados de sanguijuelas (p. ej., hirudin y sus análogos), a saber, como agentes locales o de especialidad en lugar de reemplazos de la anticoagulación oral en afecciones como el trombo del ventrículo izquierdo. Advertencia honesta: se trata de datos observacionales y retrospectivos sujetos a confusión residual a pesar del emparejamiento, no concierne a ningún producto de sanguijuela y solo informa la elección del anticoagulante sistémico, no el uso clínico de sanguijuelas medicinales.
Citación
Direct oral anticoagulants vs. warfarin for left ventricular thrombus.
Kassab et al. · European heart journal open, 2026
Contexto clínico relacionado
Explore cómo esta investigación se conecta con la práctica clínica
Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: May 28, 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: June 18, 2026