#389 An ASA a day keeps the Afib at bay?
Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ Credits
Join NowAlready a CFPCLearn Member? Log in
- Results statistically different unless
- In atrial fibrillation,1 only one Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) comparing direct oral anticoagulants (apixaban) to ASA. 5599 participants with atrial fibrillation unsuitable for warfarin (example: labile INR), age~70, CHADS~2. After ~1.1 years:
- Stroke/systemic embolism: 1.6% (apixaban) versus 3.7% (ASA).
- <65 years old: 0.7% versus 2% (ASA), Number Needed to Treat (NNT)=77.
- >75 years old: 2% versus 6.1% (ASA), NNT=25.
- >85 years old: 1% versus 7.5% (ASA). NNT=16.2
- Major bleeding: 1.4% versus 1.2% (ASA), not statistically different.
- No significant differences in any age subgroup (including >85) between apixaban and ASA, but risk increases with age, example (apixaban): 0.7% <65 years-old versus 4.7% >85 years-old.1,2
- Intracranial hemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding, no differences (0.4% all groups).
- Stroke/systemic embolism: 1.6% (apixaban) versus 3.7% (ASA).
- Bleeding risks, various populations (example: embolic strokes of undetermined source). One systematic review of direct oral anticoagulants versus ASA. After ~17.2 months:3
- Apixaban (4 RCTS, 10,978 patients):
- Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (0.5% versus 0.8% ASA), not different.
- Major hemorrhage (2.8% versus 2.4% ASA), not different.
- Dabigatran (2 RCTs, 5,695 patients):
- Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (1.2% versus 1.2% ASA), not different.
- Major hemorrhage (2.7% versus 2.3% ASA), not different.
- Rivaroxaban (3 RCTs, 28,821 patients):
- Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (0.4% versus 0.2% ASA), Number Needed to Harm (NNH)=500.
- Major hemorrhage (2.2% versus 1.4% ASA), NNH=125.
- Apixaban (4 RCTS, 10,978 patients):
- Limitations: Few RCTs in frail patients, different populations, limited information regarding types of bleeding events.
- 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines:4
- Oral anti-coagulation: >65 years-old/history of stroke, hypertension, heart failure, diabetes.
- Otherwise: No antithrombotic unless recommended for secondary prevention coronary/peripheral artery disease.
- Apixaban, edoxaban superior to warfarin for prevention stroke/systemic embolism, less major bleeding events.5,6








No antithrombotic unless recommended for secondary prevention coronary/peripheral artery disease
DOAC better than Warfarin for prevention of stroke/embolism
Confirmation
DOACs have less bleeding events than warfarin
confirmation
nice
nice explanation
Confirms my practice of using Apixaban over ASA
If a major drop in Hb to 83 from about 110 and negative endoscopy for source should you stop Apixaban completely?
Reassuring
GOOD TO KNOW
NEW INFORMATION
Good summary.
Apaxiban is the safest and most effective.
informative
no significant difference between apixaban and ASA wrt bleeding risks, nice to learn
apixaban better wrt stroke prevention
ASA not as effective
Apixiban better than ASA without increased bleeding risks.
I agree that apixiban is superior to ASA in stroke prevention
good information for young patients with Afib.