Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis
Systematic review with meta-analysis published in Pharmacotherapy (2024)
Resumen
Previous meta-analyses assessed andexanet alfa (AA) or prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) products for the treatment of Factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI)-associated major bleeding. However, they did not include recent studies or assess the impact of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AA versus PCC products for FXaI-associated major bleeding, inclusive of the studies' risk of bias. PubMed and Embase were searched for comparative studies assessing major bleeding in patients using FXaI who received AA or PCC. We used the Methodological Index for NOn-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist and one question from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal of Case Series tool to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to provide a pooled estimate for the effect of AA versus PCC products on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and thrombotic events. Low-moderate risk of bias studies were meta-analyzed separately, as well as combined with high risk of bias studies. Eighteen comparative evaluations of AA versus PCC were identified. Twenty-eight percent of the studies (n = 5) had low-moderate risk and 72% (n = 13) had a high risk of bias. Studies with low-moderate risk of bias suggested improvements in hemostatic efficacy [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.72 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.15-6.44); one study], lower in-hospital mortality [OR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.38-0.61); three studies], and reduced 30-day mortality [OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.80); two studies] when AA was used versus PCC products. When studies were included regardless of the risk of bias, pooled effects showed improvements in hemostatic efficacy [OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01-1.84); 12 studies] and reductions in 30-day mortality [OR 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37-0.76); six studies] for AA versus PCC. The difference in thrombotic events with AA versus PCC was not statistically significant in the low-moderate, high, or combined risk of bias groups. The evidence from low-moderate quality real-world studies suggests that AA is superior to PCC in enhancing hemostatic efficacy and reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality. When studies are assessed regardless of the risk of bias, the pooled hemostatic efficacy and 30-day mortality risk remain significantly better with AA versus PCC.
Resumen tomado de PubMed (NCBI) para el registro citado, en el idioma original. La versión de referencia es la de la publicación original.
El resumen se deja sin traducir para conservar la redacción original de los autores.
Síntesis
Meta-analysis of 18 comparative studies suggested andexanet alfa outperformed prothrombin complex concentrate for factor Xa inhibitor-associated major bleeding in hemostatic efficacy and mortality, with no significant thrombotic-event difference; most included studies had high risk of bias.
Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia
Esta revisión sistemática con meta-análisis comparó andexanet alfa (AA) frente a productos de concentrado de complejo protrombínico (PCC) para hemorragias mayores asociadas a inhibidores del Factor Xa a través de 18 evaluaciones comparativas y, tras una evaluación formal del riesgo de sesgo, informó que los estudios con sesgo bajo a moderado sugirieron una mejor eficacia hemostática y una menor mortalidad intrahospitalaria y a los 30 días con AA, sin diferencias estadísticamente significativas en los eventos trombóticos. Para el panorama de evidencia de la ASH, esto forma parte del escenario más amplio de reversión antitrombótica en lugar de contenido específico de sanguijuelas: los inhibidores del Factor Xa y sus agentes de reversión no son moléculas del secretoma de las sanguijuelas, pero mapean el campo más amplio de la anticoagulación dentro del cual se posicionan los inhibidores de la trombina derivados de sanguijuelas. Advertencia honesta: este es un meta-análisis de estudios mayoritariamente observacionales y de mundo real, y los autores señalan que el 72% de los estudios incluidos presentaban un alto riesgo de sesgo; las señales favorables provienen en gran medida de un pequeño número de estudios con menor sesgo, por lo que las conclusiones son sugestivas en lugar de definitivas y no conllevan ninguna implicación propia para la hirudoterapia.
Citación
Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
White et al. · Pharmacotherapy, 2024
Contexto clínico relacionado
Explore cómo esta investigación se conecta con la práctica clínica
Investigación relacionada
Más estudios revisados por pares en la categoría «Desarrollo de fármacos».
- Novel Leech Antimicrobial Peptides — Hirunipins — Kumar et al. (2025)
- Medicinal Leech Draft Genome — Anticoagulant Gene Survey — Kvist S, Manzano-Marín A, de Carle D, Trontelj P, Siddall ME (2020)
- Effects of hirudotherapy on liver functions, lipid profile, and insulin sensitivity in rats with metabolic syndrome — Bilden A et al. (2026)
- Hirudotherapy in Medicine and Dentistry — Jha K et al. (2015)
- Medicinal leech therapy (hirudotherapy): a brief overview — Singh A (2010)
- Hirudoterapia en la presbiacusia precoz en liquidadores del accidente de Chernóbil durante los años posteriores a la catástrofe — Zabolotnyi D, Mishchanchuk N (2019)
- Investigation of oxidant-antioxidant status in patients treated with hirudotherapy: an experimental study — Sarikan I, Savas H (2024)
- Leech therapeutic applications — Abdualkader A et al. (2013)
- Non-Occlusive Mesenteric Ischemia Due to Hirudotherapy: A Case Report — Akalın Ç, Ekmen N (2020)
- Leech therapy: a history — Hyson J (2005)
Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: 28 de mayo de 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: 18 de junio de 2026