Oral anticoagulants and concurrent rifampin administration in tuberculosis patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Background Evidence and guidelines for Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) use when prescribing concurrent rifampin for tuberculosis treatment in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are limited. Methods Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database fr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMC cardiovascular disorders Vol. 23; no. 1; pp. 182 - 11
Main Authors Hwang, Ki Won, Choi, Jin Hee, Lee, Soo Yong, Lee, Sang Hyun, Chon, Min Ku, Lee, Jungkuk, Kim, Hasung, Kim, Yong-Giun, Choi, Hyung Oh, Kim, Jeong Su, Park, Yong-Hyun, Kim, June Hong, Chun, Kook Jin, Nam, Gi-Byoung, Choi, Kee-Joon
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London BioMed Central 04.04.2023
BioMed Central Ltd
BMC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1471-2261
1471-2261
DOI10.1186/s12872-023-03212-z

Cover

More Information
Summary:Background Evidence and guidelines for Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) use when prescribing concurrent rifampin for tuberculosis treatment in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are limited. Methods Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database from January 2009 to December 2018, we performed a population-based retrospective cohort study to assess the net adverse clinical events (NACE), a composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding, of NOACs compared with warfarin among NVAF patients taking concurrent rifampin administration for tuberculosis treatment. After a propensity matching score (PSM) analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression was performed in matched cohorts to investigate the clinical outcomes. Results Of the 735 consecutive patients selected, 465 (63.3%) received warfarin and 270 (36.7%) received NOACs. Among 254 pairs of patients after PSM, the crude incidence rate of NACE was 25.6 in NOAC group and 32.8 per 100 person-years in warfarin group. There was no significant difference between NOAC and warfarin use in NACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48–1.14; P  = 0.172). Major bleeding was the main driver of NACE, and NOAC use was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of major bleeding than that with warfarin use (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40–1.00; P  = 0.0499). Conclusions In our population-based study, there was no statically significant difference in the occurrence of NACE between NOAC and warfarin use. NOAC use may be associated with a lower risk of major bleeding than that with warfarin use.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1471-2261
1471-2261
DOI:10.1186/s12872-023-03212-z