Article

Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Total Hip or Knee Replacement: An Update on Rivaroxaban (Xarelto).

P&T (Impact Factor: 1.07). 01/2013; 38(1):45-50.
Source: PubMed
0 Bookmarks
 · 
42 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The optimal strategy for thromboprophylaxis after major joint replacement has not been established. Low-molecular-weight heparins such as enoxaparin predominantly target factor Xa but to some extent also inhibit thrombin. Apixaban, a specific factor Xa inhibitor, may provide effective thromboprophylaxis with a low risk of bleeding and improved ease of use. In a double-blind, double-dummy study, we randomly assigned patients undergoing total knee replacement to receive 2.5 mg of apixaban orally twice daily or 30 mg of enoxaparin subcutaneously every 12 hours. Both medications were started 12 to 24 hours after surgery and continued for 10 to 14 days. Bilateral venography was then performed. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of asymptomatic and symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, and death from any cause during treatment. Patients were followed for 60 days after anticoagulation therapy was stopped. A total of 3195 patients underwent randomization, with 1599 assigned to the apixaban group and 1596 to the enoxaparin group; 908 subjects were not eligible for the efficacy analysis. The overall rate of primary events was much lower than anticipated. The rate of the primary efficacy outcome was 9.0% with apixaban as compared with 8.8% with enoxaparin (relative risk, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.32). The composite incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding was 2.9% with apixaban and 4.3% with enoxaparin (P=0.03). As compared with enoxaparin for efficacy of thromboprophylaxis after knee replacement, apixaban did not meet the prespecified statistical criteria for noninferiority, but its use was associated with lower rates of clinically relevant bleeding and it had a similar adverse-event profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00371683.)
    New England Journal of Medicine 09/2009; 361(6):594-604. · 54.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism is recommended for at least 10 days after total knee arthroplasty; oral regimens could enable shorter hospital stays. We aimed to test the efficacy and safety of oral rivaroxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee arthroplasty. In a randomised, double-blind, phase III study, 3148 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty received either oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily, beginning 6-8 h after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin 30 mg every 12 h, starting 12-24 h after surgery. Patients had mandatory bilateral venography between days 11 and 15. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of any deep-vein thrombosis, non-fatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause up to day 17 after surgery. Efficacy was assessed as non-inferiority of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin in the per-protocol population (absolute non-inferiority limit -4%); if non-inferiority was shown, we assessed whether rivaroxaban had superior efficacy in the modified intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00362232. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 67 (6.9%) of 965 patients given rivaroxaban and in 97 (10.1%) of 959 given enoxaparin (absolute risk reduction 3.19%, 95% CI 0.71-5.67; p=0.0118). Ten (0.7%) of 1526 patients given rivaroxaban and four (0.3%) of 1508 given enoxaparin had major bleeding (p=0.1096). Oral rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 10-14 days was significantly superior to subcutaneous enoxaparin 30 mg given every 12 h for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total knee arthroplasty. Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development.
    The Lancet 06/2009; 373(9676):1673-80. · 39.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This phase 3 trial compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban, an oral direct inhibitor of factor Xa, with those of enoxaparin for extended thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 4541 patients to receive either 10 mg of oral rivaroxaban once daily, beginning after surgery, or 40 mg of enoxaparin subcutaneously once daily, beginning the evening before surgery, plus a placebo tablet or injection. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of deep-vein thrombosis (either symptomatic or detected by bilateral venography if the patient was asymptomatic), nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause at 36 days (range, 30 to 42). The main secondary efficacy outcome was major venous thromboembolism (proximal deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death from venous thromboembolism). The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. A total of 3153 patients were included in the superiority analysis (after 1388 exclusions), and 4433 were included in the safety analysis (after 108 exclusions). The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 18 of 1595 patients (1.1%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 58 of 1558 patients (3.7%) in the enoxaparin group (absolute risk reduction, 2.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5 to 3.7; P<0.001). Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 4 of 1686 patients (0.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 33 of 1678 patients (2.0%) in the enoxaparin group (absolute risk reduction, 1.7%; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.5; P<0.001). Major bleeding occurred in 6 of 2209 patients (0.3%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 2 of 2224 patients (0.1%) in the enoxaparin group (P=0.18). A once-daily, 10-mg oral dose of rivaroxaban was significantly more effective for extended thromboprophylaxis than a once-daily, 40-mg subcutaneous dose of enoxaparin in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. The two drugs had similar safety profiles. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00329628.)
    New England Journal of Medicine 06/2008; 358(26):2765-75. · 54.42 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
0 Downloads
Available from