We thank Dr Trusler for his interest in our articles,1,2 but we disagree with his claim that we “ignored some very significant facts” pertaining to a comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) with warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).
The objective of our articles1,2 was not to compare NOACs with warfarin, which has been comprehensively reviewed elsewhere.3,4 Instead, we specifically explained the following:
[T]his review focuses on treating patients who are currently taking NOACs and does not consider the process for choosing an appropriate anticoagulant for AF or VTE [venous thromboembolism], whether an NOAC or warfarin.1
We also stated:
[Warfarin] remains a treatment option for patients with AF or VTE [venous thromboembolism] in whom excellent anticoagulation control is attainable.1
Rather than engage in a potentially protracted debate on the relative merits and drawbacks of NOACs and warfarin as anticoagulants, we urge readers to reach their own conclusions by reviewing the evidence and by considering patient values and preferences, as well as the costs, of these treatment options. We also would refer readers to clinical practice guidelines developed by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, the American College of Chest Physicians, and the European Society of Cardiology, which endorse the use of NOACs as a first-line anticoagulant option for stroke prevention for most patients with AF based on at least comparable efficacy and safety, and less intracranial hemorrhage compared with warfarin.5–7
Footnotes
Competing interests
None declared
References
- 1.Douketis J, Bell AD, Eikelboom J, Liew A. Approach to the new oral anticoagulants in family practice. Part 1: comparing the options. Can Fam Physician. 2014;60:989–95. (Eng), e504–11 (Fr). [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Douketis J, Bell AD, Eikelboom J, Liew A. Approach to the new oral anticoagulants in family practice. Part 2: addressing frequently asked questions. Can Fam Physician. 2014;60:997–1001. (Eng), e512–7 (Fr). [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, Hoffman EB, Deenadayalu N, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9921):955–62. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62343-0. Epub 2013 Dec 4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Liew A, O’Donnell M, Douketis J. Comparing mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation who are receiving a direct-acting oral anticoagulant or warfarin: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Thromb Haemost. 2014;12(9):1419–24. doi: 10.1111/jth.12651. Epub 2014 Jul 25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Verma A, Cairns JA, Mitchell LB, Macle L, Stiell IG, Gladstone D, et al. 2014 focused update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30(10):1114–30. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2014.08.001. Epub 2014 Aug 13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.You JJ, Singer DE, Howard PA, Lane DA, Eckman MH, Fang MC, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e531S–75S. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-2304. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Camm AJ, Lip GY, De Caterina R, Savelieva I, Atar D, Hohnloser SH, et al. 2012 focused update of the ESC guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(21):2719–47. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs253. Epub 2012 Aug 24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]