mechanism | treatment | Demonstrated benefit and harm | k | | | |
---|
antiarrythmic drugs | amiodarone | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Channer, 2004 | amiodarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.54 [0.41; 0.69] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 4.98 [0.65; 38.29] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | GEFACA, 2001 | amiodarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.32 [0.17; 0.60] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Kochiadakis (amiodarone vs placebo), 2000 | amiodarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.53 [0.39; 0.73] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | SAFE-T (amiodarone vs placebo), 2005 | amiodarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.58 [0.50; 0.66] | | all cause mortality 2.14 [0.62; 7.39] Pro-arrhythmia 1.48 [0.30; 7.25] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Channer, 2004 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=61) vs. placebo (n=38) | patients with Persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 61/38 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | GEFACA, 2001 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=35) vs. placebo (n=15) | Persistent AF lasting > 2 months | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 35/15 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 16 months | Kochiadakis (amiodarone vs placebo), 2000 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=65) vs. placebo (n=60) | Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF | single Parallel groups Sample size: 65/60 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months | SAFE-T (amiodarone vs placebo), 2005 | Amiodarone 300 mg/d (n=267) vs. placebo (n=137) | Persistent AF lasting 3 days to 1 year | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 267/137 Primary endpoint: recurrence of atrial fibrillation FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | amiodarone | versus Class I No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AFFIRM Substudy (amiodarone vs class I drugs), 2003 | amiodarone vs class I drugs | all cause mortality 0.42 [0.21; 0.83] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.33 [0.21; 0.53] Pro-arrhythmia 0.20 [0.08; 0.51] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.66 [0.55; 0.80] | | Cardiac arrhythmic death 0.63 [0.19; 2.08] | AFFIRM Substudy (sotalol vs class I drugs), 2003 | amiodarone vs class I drugs | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AFFIRM Substudy (amiodarone vs class I drugs), 2003 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d
, (n=106) vs. class I drugs (n=116)
| patients with AF likely to be recurrent and to cause ilness or deathpj
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 106/116 Primary endpoint: success FU duration: 12 months, and 3.8y
| AFFIRM Substudy (sotalol vs class I drugs), 2003 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d
,
, sotalol (n=-9) vs. class I drugs
(n=-9)
| patients with AF likely to be recurrent and to cause ilness or deathpj
| open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months, and 3.8y
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | amiodarone | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Villani, 1992 | amiodarone vs disopyramide | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.55 [0.35; 0.85] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.35 [0.10; 1.18] | Vitolo, 1981 | amiodarone vs quinidine | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.40 [0.18; 0.88] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.93 [0.06; 14.10] Pro-arrhythmia 0.93 [0.06; 14.10] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Villani, 1992 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=35) vs. disopyramide 500 mg/d (n=41) | Symptomatic recent-onset AF lasting > 1 hour, being at least the second episode | open Parallel groups Sample size: 35/41 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 14 months | Vitolo, 1981 | Amiodarone 400 mg/d (n=28) vs. Quinidine 1,2 g/d (n=26) | Any persistent AF | open Parallel groups Sample size: 28/26 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | amiodarone | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy amiodarone inferior to propafenone in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Kochiadakis a, 2004 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Kochiadakis a, 2004 | amiodarone vs propafenone | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 8.74 [2.09; 36.46] | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.03 [0.15; 7.10] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.64 [0.41; 1.01] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Kochiadakis a, 2004 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=72) vs. propafenone 450 mg/d (n=74) | Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF | single Parallel groups Sample size: 72/74 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | amiodarone | versus Class III No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AFFIRM Substudy (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2003 | amiodarone vs sotalol | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.68 [0.54; 0.86] | | all cause mortality 0.60 [0.33; 1.08] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.83 [0.47; 1.47] Pro-arrhythmia 0.49 [0.17; 1.42] Cardiac arrhythmic death 0.95 [0.28; 3.22] | Kochiadakis (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2000 | amiodarone vs sotalol | | | | SAFE-T (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2005 | amiodarone vs sotalol | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AFFIRM Substudy (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2003 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d (n=131) vs. Sotalol 240 mg/d (n=125) | patients with AF likely to be recurrent and to cause ilness or deathpj | open Parallel groups Sample size: 131/125 Primary endpoint: FU duration: mean 3.8y | Kochiadakis (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2000 | Amiodarone 200 mg/d
, Amiodarone 200 mg/d
(n=65) vs. (n=61)
| Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF
| single Parallel groups Sample size: 65/61 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months
| SAFE-T (amiodarone vs sotalol), 2005 | Amiodarone 300 mg/d
, Amiodarone 300 mg/d
(n=267) vs. (n=261)
| Persistent AF lasting 3 days to 1 year
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 267/261 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | Azimilide | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy Azimilide inferior to placebo in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in ASAP, 2003 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ASAP, 2003 | Azimilide vs placebo | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.30 [1.20; 4.39] | all cause mortality 1.23 [0.38; 3.99] Pro-arrhythmia 6.04 [0.78; 46.62] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ASAP, 2003 | Azimilide various doses (35 to 125 mg/d) after pharmacological or electrical cardioversion (n=891) vs. placebo (n=489) | patients with previous AF documented in the last 2 years | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 891/489 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | disopyramide | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Karlson, 1998 | disopyramide vs placebo | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 3.50 [0.77; 15.96] Pro-arrhythmia NaN [NaN; NaN] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.75 [0.54; 1.05] | Lloyd (Disopyramide vs placebo), 1984 | disopyramide vs placebo | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia NaN [NaN; NaN] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.81 [0.53; 1.24] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Karlson, 1998 | Disopyramide 500 mg/d (n=46) vs. palcebo (n=46) | Persistent AF between 6 weeks and 1 year | open Parallel groups Sample size: 46/46 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Lloyd (Disopyramide vs placebo), 1984 | Disopyramide 450 mg/d , (n=29) vs. placebo
(n=25)
| Persistent AF lasting 1 month to 3 years
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 29/25 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | disopyramide | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Lloyd (Disopyramide vs quinidine), 1984 | disopyramide vs quinidine | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Lloyd (Disopyramide vs quinidine), 1984 | Disopyramide 450 mg/d ,
,
(n=29) vs. placebo
(n=28)
| Persistent AF lasting 1 month to 3 years
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 29/28 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | disopyramide | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PRODIS, 1996 | disopyramide vs propafenone | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.40 [0.14; 1.19] Pro-arrhythmia 0.81 [0.05; 12.26] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.73 [0.37; 1.44] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PRODIS, 1996 | Disopyramide 750 mg/d (n=31) vs. propafenone 900 mg/d (n=25) | Persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 31/25 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | dofetilide | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
DIAMOND, 2001 | dofetilide vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.62 [0.54; 0.70] | | all cause mortality 0.99 [0.77; 1.29] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | SAFIRE-D, 2000 | dofetilide vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.85 [0.72; 1.00] | | all cause mortality 0.75 [0.19; 2.90] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.68 [0.37; 7.59] Pro-arrhythmia 4.48 [0.59; 33.83] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
DIAMOND, 2001 | Dofetilide 500 mcg/d5 (n=249) vs. placebo (n=257) | Persistent AF in patients with heart failure or recent myocardial infarction and reduced LVEF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 249/257 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months | SAFIRE-D, 2000 | Dofetilide various doses (250, 500, 1000 mcg/d) (n=182) vs. placebo (n=68) | Persistent AF or AFl lasting 2 weeks to 6 months | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 182/68 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | dronedarone | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy dronedarone inferior to placebo in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in ATHENA, 2009 dronedarone inferior to placebo in terms of Stroke in PALLAS, 2011 dronedarone inferior to placebo in terms of HF hospitalization
in PALLAS, 2011 dronedarone inferior to placebo in terms of Cardiovascular events in PALLAS, 2011 dronedarone inferior to placebo in terms of Death, unplanned CV hospitalization in PALLAS, 2011 | 7 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
EURIDIS, 2007 | dronedarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.78 [0.64; 0.95] Death, unplanned CV hospitalization 0.66 [0.47; 0.93] | | | ADONIS, 2007 | dronedarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.73 [0.60; 0.89] | | Death, unplanned CV hospitalization 0.80 [0.56; 1.14] | DAFNE, 2003 | dronedarone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.86 [0.75; 0.98] | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia NaN [NaN; NaN] | EURIDIS ADONIS (pooled analysis), 2009 | dronedarone vs placebo | | | all cause mortality 1.32 [0.35; 4.94] Stroke 1.98 [0.22; 17.62] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.36 [0.91; 2.05] | ATHENA, 2009 | dronedarone vs placebo | cardiovascular death 0.71 [0.52; 0.97] Cardiovascular events 0.81 [0.75; 0.88] Cardiac arrhythmic death 0.55 [0.34; 0.88] hospitalization for AF 0.66 [0.59; 0.75] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.66 [0.59; 0.75] Death, unplanned CV hospitalization 0.81 [0.75; 0.88] | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.57 [1.32; 1.87] | all cause mortality 0.84 [0.66; 1.07] HF hospitalization
0.86 [0.67; 1.10] non CV death 1.09 [0.74; 1.61] Vascular noncardiac death 0.84 [0.47; 1.52] Cardiac nonarrhythmic death 0.96 [0.49; 1.85] | ERATO, 2008 | dronedarone vs placebo | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.51 [0.68; 3.35] | PALLAS, 2011 | dronedarone vs placebo | | Stroke 2.42 [1.01; 5.82] HF hospitalization
2.26 [1.24; 4.13] Cardiovascular events 2.28 [1.22; 4.25] Death, unplanned CV hospitalization 1.45 [1.10; 1.91] | all cause mortality 2.28 [0.94; 5.52] MI 1.00 [0.20; 4.93] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
EURIDIS, 2007 | dronedarone 400 mg twice daily
(n=411) vs. placebo
(n=201)
| patients with at least one episode of atrial fibrillation in the preceding 3 months, and in sinus rhythm for at least 1 hour before randomization
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 411/201 Primary endpoint: recurrence of atrial fibrillation FU duration: 12 months
| ADONIS, 2007 | dronedarone 400 mg twice daily (n=417) vs. placebo (n=208) | patients with at least one episode of atrial fibrillation in the preceding 3 months, and in sinus rhythm for at least 1 hour before randomization | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 417/208 Primary endpoint: recurrence of atrial fibrillation FU duration: 12 months | DAFNE, 2003 | Dronedarone various doses (800, 1200, 1600 mg/d) (n=151) vs. placebo (n=48) | patients with Persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 151/48 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | EURIDIS ADONIS (pooled analysis), 2009 | Dronedarone 800 mg/d (n=828) vs. placebo (n=409) | AF documented in the previous 3 months | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 828/409 Primary endpoint: First Recurrence of Atrial Fibrillation or flutter FU duration: 12 months | ATHENA, 2009 | dronedarone 400 mg twice a day (n=2301) vs. placebo (n=2327) | patients (>70y)
with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation and additional risk factors for death | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2301/2327 Primary endpoint: first hospitalization due to cardiovascular events or death FU duration: 21.5 months | ERATO, 2008 | dronedarone 400 mg twice daily (n=85) vs. placebo (n=89) | patients with permanent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 85/89 Primary endpoint: ventricular rate FU duration: 6 months | PALLAS, 2011 | Dronedarone (n=1577) vs. placebo (n=1572) | patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and additional risk factors | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1577/1572 Primary endpoint: major cardiovascular events FU duration: 3 years |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | dronedarone | versus amiodarone No demonstrated result for efficacy dronedarone inferior to amiodarone in terms of Atrial fibrillation recurrence in DIONISOS, 2007 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
DIONISOS, 2007 | dronedarone vs amiodarone | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.48 [0.25; 0.90] | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.34 [1.17; 1.53] | all cause mortality 0.41 [0.08; 2.09] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
DIONISOS, 2007 | Dronedarone (400mg BID) (n=249) vs. Amiodarone (600mg daily for 28 days, then 200mg daily thereafter) (n=255) | Patients with documented atrial fibrillation for more than 72 hours for whom cardioversion and antiarrhythmic treatment is indicated in the opinion of the investigator and under oral anticoagulation | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 249/255 Primary endpoint: treatment failure FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | flecainide | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Carunchio (flecainide vs placebo), 1995 | flecainide vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.41 [0.20; 0.83] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Van Gelder, 1989 | flecainide vs no treatment | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.81 [0.55; 1.20] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Carunchio (flecainide vs placebo), 1995 | Flecainide 200 mg/d (n=20) vs. placebo (n=26) | patients with recurrent AF with > 3 episodes in previous 1 year
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 20/26 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Van Gelder, 1989 | Flecainide 200-300 mg/d (n=36) vs. no treatment (n=37) | Any persistent AF or AFl | open Parallel groups Sample size: 36/37 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | flecainide | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy flecainide inferior to quinidine in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Naccarelli, 1996 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Naccarelli, 1996 | flecainide vs quinidine | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.66 [1.04; 2.65] | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.49 [0.59; 3.78] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.04 [0.91; 1.19] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Naccarelli, 1996 | Flecainide 200-300 mg/d (n=117) vs. Quinidine 1-1,5 g/d (n=122) | Any documented symptomatic AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 117/122 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | flecainide | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Aliot, 1996 | flecainide vs propafenone | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.23 [0.05; 1.00] | | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.75 [0.48; 1.16] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Aliot, 1996 | Flecainide 100-200mg/d (n=48) vs. Propafenone 600 mg/d (n=49) | patients with paroxysmal AF documented any time before | open Parallel groups Sample size: 48/49 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | flecainide | versus digoxin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Steinbeck (flecainide vs digoxin), 1988 | flecainide vs digoxin | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.46 [0.24; 0.88] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.00 [0.07; 14.55] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Steinbeck (flecainide vs digoxin), 1988 | flecainide 200-300 mg/d (+ digoxine) (n=15) vs. (n=15)
| Paroxysmal symptomatic AF of any duration
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 15/15 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | metoprolol | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy metoprolol inferior to placebo in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Kuhlkamp, 2000 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Kuhlkamp, 2000 | metoprolol vs placebo | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 3.33 [1.37; 8.12] | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.91 [0.79; 1.04] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Kuhlkamp, 2000 | Metoprolol 100 mg/d (n=197) vs. placebo (n=197) | Persistent AF lasting 2 days to 1 year | double blnd Parallel groups Sample size: 197/197 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | propafenone | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 5 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Bellandi (propafenone vs placebo), 2001 | propafenone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.65 [0.50; 0.85] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.71 [0.76; 9.69] Pro-arrhythmia NaN [NaN; NaN] | Dogan, 2004 | propafenone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.69 [0.49; 0.97] | | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 3.59 [0.41; 31.07] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Kochiadakis b (propafenone vs placebo), 2004 | propafenone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.58 [0.44; 0.78] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | RAFT, 2003 | propafenone vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.71 [0.63; 0.79] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.29 [0.79; 2.11] Pro-arrhythmia NaN [NaN; NaN] | Stroobandt, 1997 | propafenone vs placebo | | | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.14 [0.25; 5.12] Pro-arrhythmia 0.49 [0.09; 2.75] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.71 [0.50; 1.01] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Bellandi (propafenone vs placebo), 2001 | Propafenone 900 mg/d/d after pharmacological or electrical cardioversion (n=102) vs. placebo (n=92) | patients with paroxysmal recurrent or persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 102/92 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Dogan, 2004 | Propafenone 450 mg/d (n=58) vs. placebo (n=52) | AF of duration 3 hours to 3 months ??? | single Parallel groups Sample size: 58/52 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 15 months | Kochiadakis b (propafenone vs placebo), 2004 | Propafenone 450 mg/d (n=86) vs. placebo (n=83) | Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF
| single Parallel groups Sample size: 86/83 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months | RAFT, 2003 | Propafenone at various doses (450, 650, 850 mg/d) (n=397) vs. placebo. (n=126) | Previous symptomatic AF documented in the last year | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 397/126 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 9 months | Stroobandt, 1997 | Propafenone 450 mg/d (n=77) vs. placebo (n=25) | Recent-onset AF or persistent AF lasting > 2 weeks | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 77/25 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | propafenone | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy propafenone inferior to quinidine in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Richiardi, 1992 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Richiardi, 1992 | propafenone vs quinidine | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.39 [1.20; 4.77] | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.04 [0.15; 7.24] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.12 [0.87; 1.44] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Richiardi, 1992 | Propafenone 900 mg/d (n=98) vs. Quinidine 1 g/d mg/d (n=102) | Paroxysmal AF having > 3 episodes in the last 3 months | open Parallel groups Sample size: 98/102 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | propafenone | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
FAPIS, 1996 | propafenone vs flecainide | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.18 [0.50; 2.78] Pro-arrhythmia 2.12 [0.20; 23.05] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.06 [0.70; 1.62] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
FAPIS, 1996 | propafenone 520 mg/dt (n=97) vs. Flecainide 200 mg/d (n=103) | Paroxysmal recurrent AF with > 2 episodes in the last 4 months | open Parallel groups Sample size: 97/103 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | propafenone | versus Class III No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Reimold, 1993 | propafenone vs sotalol | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.50 [0.45; 4.99] Pro-arrhythmia 1.50 [0.58; 3.90] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.91 [0.69; 1.20] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Reimold, 1993 | Propafenone 675 mg/d (n=50) vs. Sotalol 320 mg/d (n=50) | Any symptomatic AF or AFlx-xbitm | open Parallel groups Sample size: 50/50 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | quinidine | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy quinidine inferior to no treatment in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Sodermark, 1975 | 6 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Hillestad, 1971 | quinidine vs no treatment | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.74 [0.48; 1.15] | Lloyd (quinidine vs placebo), 1984 | quinidine vs placebo | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.84 [0.55; 1.28] | PAFAC (quinidine vs placebo), 2004 | quinidine vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.78 [0.69; 0.88] | | all cause mortality 1.05 [0.23; 4.78] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.10 [0.72; 1.68] Pro-arrhythmia 1.98 [0.47; 8.43] | SOPAT (quinidine vs placebo), 2004 | quinidine vs placebo | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.74 [0.55; 1.00] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.89 [0.82; 0.96] | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia 1.29 [0.35; 4.83] | Sodermark, 1975 | quinidine vs no treatment | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.73 [0.58; 0.92] | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 5.68 [1.78; 18.14] | all cause mortality 2.05 [0.42; 9.86] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Byrne Quinn, 1979 | quinidine vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.79 [0.64; 0.97] | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.46 [0.67; 3.16] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Hillestad, 1971 | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Lloyd (quinidine vs placebo), 1984 | quinidine 1.4 g/d (n=-9) vs. placebo (n=25) | Persistent AF lasting 1 month to 3 years | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: -9/25 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | PAFAC (quinidine vs placebo), 2004 | Quinidine 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil (n=377) vs. placebo (n=88) | Persistent AF lasting > 7 daysil | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 377/88 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | SOPAT (quinidine vs placebo), 2004 | Quinidine 0,320 or 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil) (n=518) vs. placebo (n=251) | Paroxysmal AF documented in the last 1 month@4 | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 518/251 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Sodermark, 1975 | Quinidine 1.2 - 1.8 g/d (n=110) vs. no treatment (n=75) | Persistent AF or AFl lasting < 3 year | open Parallel groups Sample size: 110/75 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Byrne Quinn, 1979 | Quinidine 1.2 g/d (n=32) vs. placebo (n=42) | Persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 32/42 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | quinidine | versus Class Ia No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Lloyd (quinidine vs disopyramide), 1984 | quinidine vs disopyramide | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Lloyd (quinidine vs disopyramide), 1984 | quinidine 1.4 g/d
, quinidine 1.4 g/d
(n=28) vs. (n=29)
| Persistent AF lasting 1 month to 3 years
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 28/29 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | quinidine | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Steinbeck (quinidine vs flecainide), 1988 | quinidine vs flecainide | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Steinbeck (quinidine vs flecainide), 1988 | Quinidine 1 g/d (+ digoxine)
, Quinidine 1 g/d (+ digoxine)
(n=15) vs. (n=15)
| Paroxysmal symptomatic AF of any duration
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 15/15 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | quinidine | versus Class III No demonstrated result for efficacy quinidine inferior to sotalol in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Hohnloser, 1995 quinidine inferior to sotalol in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Juul-Moller, 1990 | 6 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Hohnloser, 1995 | quinidine vs sotalol | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 10.00 [1.38; 72.39] | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 3.00 [0.33; 26.92] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.58 [0.28; 1.23] | Juul-Moller, 1990 | quinidine vs sotalol | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.31 [1.19; 4.47] | all cause mortality 1.15 [0.07; 18.15] Pro-arrhythmia 1.15 [0.07; 18.15] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.13 [0.87; 1.47] | Kalusche, 1994 | quinidine vs sotalol | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.33 [0.65; 8.40] Pro-arrhythmia 0.50 [0.05; 5.30] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.71 [0.43; 1.18] | SOCESP, 1999 | quinidine vs sotalol | | | all cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.32 [0.54; 3.23] Pro-arrhythmia 0.61 [0.11; 3.54] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.15 [0.72; 1.84] | PAFAC (quinidine vs sotalol), 2004 | quinidine vs sotalol | | | | SOPAT (quinidine vs sotalol), 2004 | quinidine vs sotalol | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Hohnloser, 1995 | Quinidine 1 g/d (n=25) vs. sotalol 240-320 mg/dt (n=25) | Persistent AF between 2 days and 6 months | open Parallel groups Sample size: 25/25 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | Juul-Moller, 1990 | Quinidine 1,2 g/d (n=85) vs. Sotalol 160-320 mg/dt (n=98) | Persistent AF between 2 months and 1 year | open Parallel groups Sample size: 85/98 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | Kalusche, 1994 | Quinidine 1 g/d (n=41) vs. Sotalol 240-400 mg/dt (n=41) | AF lasting from 2 weeks to 2 years | open Parallel groups Sample size: 41/41 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | SOCESP, 1999 | Quinidine 700 mg/d (n=63) vs. sotalol 240 mg/d (n=58) | AF lasting < 6 months | open Parallel groups Sample size: 63/58 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | PAFAC (quinidine vs sotalol), 2004 | Quinidine 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil
, Quinidine 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil
(n=377) vs. (n=383)
| Persistent AF lasting > 7 daysil
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 377/383 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| SOPAT (quinidine vs sotalol), 2004 | Quinidine 0,320 or 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil)
, Quinidine 0,320 or 0,480 g/d (+ verapamil)
(n=518) vs. (n=264)
| Paroxysmal AF documented in the last 1 month@4
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 518/264 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | quinidine | versus digoxin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Steinbeck (quinidine vs digoxin), 1988 | quinidine vs digoxin | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia 2.00 [0.20; 19.78] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.77 [0.51; 1.16] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Steinbeck (quinidine vs digoxin), 1988 | Quinidine 1 g/d (+ digoxine) (n=15) vs. digoxine alone (n=15) | Paroxysmal symptomatic AF of any duration | open Parallel groups Sample size: 15/15 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months |
|
antiarrythmic drugs | sotalol | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy sotalol inferior to placebo in terms of Withdrawals due to adverse effects in Benditt, 1999 | 9 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Benditt, 1999 | sotalol vs placebo | | Withdrawals due to adverse effects 9.38 [1.29; 67.87] | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia 1.38 [0.40; 4.78] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.98 [0.84; 1.14] | Singh, 1991 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.79 [0.64; 0.97] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Bellandi (sotalol vs placebo), 2001 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.57 [0.43; 0.76] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 2.03 [0.54; 7.61] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Carunchio (sotalol vs placebo), 1995 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.55 [0.30; 0.98] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects NaN [NaN; NaN] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Kochiadakis (sotalol vs placebo), 2000 | sotalol vs placebo | | | | Kochiadakis b (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.72 [0.56; 0.93] | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects ∞ [NaN; ∞] Pro-arrhythmia ∞ [NaN; ∞] | PAFAC (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.80 [0.71; 0.90] | | all cause mortality 1.49 [0.34; 6.50] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.10 [0.72; 1.68] Pro-arrhythmia 2.30 [0.55; 9.65] | SAFE-T (sotalol vs placebo), 2005 | sotalol vs placebo | Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.81 [0.73; 0.90] | | all cause mortality 2.53 [0.75; 8.58] Pro-arrhythmia 2.28 [0.50; 10.38] | SOPAT (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol vs placebo | | | all cause mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 0.88 [0.63; 1.23] Pro-arrhythmia 0.63 [0.11; 3.76] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 0.92 [0.84; 1.01] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Benditt, 1999 | Sotalol various doses (80, 120, 160 mg/d) after cardioversion (n=184) vs. placebo (n=69) | patients with AF or AFl documented in the last 3 months | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 184/69 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Singh, 1991 | Sotalol 80 - 320 mg/d (n=24) vs. placebo (n=10) | Persistent AF or AFl lasting 2 weeks to 1 year | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 24/10 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months | Bellandi (sotalol vs placebo), 2001 | sotalol 240 mg/d (n=106) vs. placebo
(n=92)
| patients with paroxysmal recurrent or persistent AF
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 106/92 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| Carunchio (sotalol vs placebo), 1995 | sotalol 240 mg/d
, (n=20) vs. placebo
(n=26)
| patients with recurrent AF with > 3 episodes in previous 1 year
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 20/26 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| Kochiadakis (sotalol vs placebo), 2000 | sotalol 320 mg/d (n=-9) vs. placebo
(n=-9)
| Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF
| single Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months
| Kochiadakis b (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol 300 mg/d (n=85) vs. placebo
(n=83) | Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF
| single Parallel groups Sample size: 85/83 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months
| PAFAC (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol 320 mg/d , (n=383) vs. placebo
(n=88)
| Persistent AF lasting > 7 daysil
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 383/88 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| SAFE-T (sotalol vs placebo), 2005 | sotalol 320 mg/d (n=261) vs. placebo
(n=132)
| Persistent AF lasting 3 days to 1 year
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 261/132 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| SOPAT (sotalol vs placebo), 2004 | sotalol 320 mg/d , (n=264) vs. placebo
(n=251)
| Paroxysmal AF documented in the last 1 month@4
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 264/251 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | sotalol | versus Class Ic No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Carunchio (sotalol vs flecianide), 1995 | sotalol vs flecainide | | | | Kochiadakis b (sotalol vs propafenome), 2004 | sotalol vs propafenone | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Carunchio (sotalol vs flecianide), 1995 | sotalol 240 mg/d
,
, sotalol 240 mg/d
,
(n=20) vs. (n=20)
| patients with recurrent AF with > 3 episodes in previous 1 year
| open Parallel groups Sample size: 20/20 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months
| Kochiadakis b (sotalol vs propafenome), 2004 | sotalol 300 mg/d
,
, sotalol 300 mg/d
,
(n=85) vs. (n=86)
| Any documented symptomatic previous or persistent AF
| single Parallel groups Sample size: 85/86 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24 months
|
|
antiarrythmic drugs | sotalol | versus Class II No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Plewan, 2001 | sotalol vs bisoprolol | | | all cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Withdrawals due to adverse effects 1.33 [0.31; 5.72] Pro-arrhythmia 1.33 [0.31; 5.72] Atrial fibrillation recurrence 1.07 [0.74; 1.55] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Plewan, 2001 | Sotalol 160 mg/d (n=64) vs. bisoprolol 5 mg/d (n=64) | Persistent AF | open Parallel groups Sample size: 64/64 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 8 months |
|
anticoagulant | aspirin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
EAFT, 1993 | aspirin vs placebo | | | stroke*(all stroke or ischemic stroke) 0.91 [0.71; 1.18] Non fatal TE event,bleedings and vascular death 0.89 [0.74; 1.09] thromboembolic event*(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic thromboembolic event) 0.82 [0.60; 1.11] | FFAACS , 2001 | aspirin vs placebo (on top fluidione) | | | stroke,myocardial infarction,systemic arterial emboli or vascular death 2.66 [0.53; 13.33] Non fatal TE event,bleedings and vascular death 2.66 [0.53; 13.33] fatal bleeding 2.13 [0.20; 23.03] thromboembolic event*(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic thromboembolic event) 2.13 [0.20; 23.03] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
EAFT, 1993 | aspirin 300 mg/d (n=404) vs. placebo (n=378) There were 2 groups in the study:
-patients eligible for anticoagulation(g1) who were randomly assigned to receive either open label oral anticoagulants or double blind treatment with aspirin or placebo
-patients ineligible for anticoagulation (g2) who were randomised to double blind treatment with aspirin 300 mg or matching placebo. | Patient with non rheumatic AF and recent TIA or minor ischaemic stroke(secondary prevention). | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 404/378 Primary endpoint: death from vascular disease,stroke,myocardial infarction or sytemic embolism FU duration: 2.3 years | FFAACS , 2001 | fluidione standard dose (target INR: 2-2.6) + aspirin low dose 100 mg (n=76) vs. fluidione standard dose(target INR:2-2.6) + placebo (n=81) | high risk patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 76/81 Primary endpoint: stroke,myocardial infarction,systemic arterial emboli or vascular death FU duration: 0.84 y |
|
anticoagulant | clopidogrel | versus antiplatelet drugs No demonstrated result for efficacy aspirin + clopidogrel inferior to aspirin in terms of major bleeding in ACTIVE A, 2009 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ACTIVE A, 2009 | aspirin + clopidogrel vs aspirin | fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.72 [0.59; 0.88] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.90 [0.83; 0.98] ischemic stroke 0.69 [0.59; 0.81] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.89 [0.89; 0.89] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.73 [0.63; 0.84] | major bleeding 1.57 [1.29; 1.91] | all death 0.98 [0.90; 1.07] vascular death 1.00 [0.91; 1.11] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 1.37 [0.79; 2.37] fatal bleeding 1.56 [0.96; 2.52] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ACTIVE A, 2009 | clopidogrel 75 mg daily + aspirin 75-100 mg daily (n=3772) vs. aspirin 75-100 mg daily alone (n=3782) | Patients with AF and at least one risk factor for stroke and who are not candidates for warfarin therapy | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 3772/3782 Primary endpoint: stroke, MI, systemic embolus, or vascular death FU duration: 3.7 y |
|
anticoagulant | coumadin | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PATAF (coumadin low dose vs coumadin standard dose), 1999 | coumadin low dose vs coumadin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.86 [0.35; 2.11] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.07 [0.22; 5.22] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PATAF (coumadin low dose vs coumadin standard dose), 1999 | coumarin low dose(target INR 1.1-1.6) (n=122) vs. coumarin standard dose(target INR 2.5-3.5) (n=131) The PATAF trial includes 2 strata:
-patients eligible for standard intensity coumarin:randomly assigned to standard anticoagulation(INR 2.5-3.5),very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d).
-patients ineligible for standard anticoagulation:randomly assigned to very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d). | non rheumatic AF,recruited in general practice,with no established indication for anticoagulation. | Simple aveugle Parallel groups Sample size: 122/131 Primary endpoint: stroke,systemic embolism,major haemorrhage and vascular death FU duration: 2.7 years The study was carried out to show that aspirin is equivalent to warfarin, but the methodology used was inappropriate.The study team conducted an intention to treat analysis and assumed they could conclude to equivalence if no significant difference was found between treatments at the end of the study.But this hypothesis is wrong :if no difference has been found,no conclusion is possible,and particularly, equivalence can't be proven. |
|
anticoagulant | dabigatran | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy dabigatran 150mg inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of Gastrointestinal major bleeding in RE-LY (150mg), 2009 | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PETRO (150mg), 2007 | dabigatran 150mg vs warfarin standard dose | | | | RE-LY (150mg), 2009 | dabigatran 150mg vs warfarin standard dose | haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.26 [0.14; 0.49] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.67 [0.51; 0.89] non fatal stroke 0.63 [0.43; 0.92] fatal bleeding 0.82 [0.67; 1.00] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.66 [0.53; 0.82] ischemic stroke 0.76 [0.59; 0.97] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.64 [0.51; 0.81] Life threatening major bleeding 0.82 [0.67; 1.00] | Gastrointestinal major bleeding 1.50 [1.20; 1.89] | all death 0.88 [0.77; 1.00] coronary events 1.29 [0.99; 1.69] vascular death 0.85 [0.72; 1.00] major bleeding 0.93 [0.81; 1.07] Non–life threatening Major bleeding 1.08 [0.90; 1.30] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.85 [0.39; 1.84] | RE-LY 150mg (2nd prevention subgroup) | dabigatran 150mg vs warfarin | haemorragic stroke(intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.27 [0.10; 0.72] intra cranial hemorrhage(intracerebral hemorrhage + hematomas) 0.41 [0.21; 0.80] | | thromboembolic event(cerebral or systemic) 0.76 [0.53; 1.09] thromboembolic event*(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic thromboembolic event) 0.76 [0.53; 1.09] | RE-LY 110mg (2nd prevention subgroup) , 2010 | dabigatran 100mg vs warfarin | haemorragic stroke(intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.11 [0.03; 0.44] intra cranial hemorrhage(intracerebral hemorrhage + hematomas) 0.20 [0.08; 0.48] | | thromboembolic event(cerebral or systemic) 0.85 [0.59; 1.22] thromboembolic event*(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic thromboembolic event) 0.85 [0.59; 1.22] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PETRO (150mg), 2007 | dabigatran
150 mg twice daily (alone or combined with 81- or 325-mg aspirin) (n=166) vs. warfarin administered to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2 to 3 for (n=70) factorial design: Three doses of dabigatran etexilate (50, 150, and 300 mg twice daily) were combined in a 3 3 factorial fashion with no aspirin or 81- or 325-mg aspirin once daily. | patients
with AF at high risk for thromboembolic events | double blind Factorial plan Sample size: 166/70 Primary endpoint: bleedings FU duration: 12 weeks | RE-LY (150mg), 2009 | dabigatran 150 mg twice a day (n=6076) vs. warfarin adjusted-dose to a 2.0 to 3.0 INR (n=6022) 3 arms: dabigatran 110 mg, 150mg and warfarin | Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation | open (blind assessment) Parallel groups Sample size: 6076/6022 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 2 y (median) | RE-LY 150mg (2nd prevention subgroup) | dabigatran 150mg daily (n=-9) vs. warfarin (n=-9) | patients with a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack | open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 2 y sub group ( 20% of the overall study population in RE-LY) | RE-LY 110mg (2nd prevention subgroup) , 2010 | dabigatran 110mg daily
(n=-9) vs. warfarin
(n=-9)
| patients with a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack
| open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 2 y sub group ( 20% of the overall study population in RE-LY)
|
|
anticoagulant | edoxaban | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Weitz (edoxaban phase 2) | edoxaban vs warfarin standard dose | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Weitz (edoxaban phase 2) | Four Fixed Dose Regimens of edoxaban (DU-176b) (n=1146) vs. warfarin (n=0) | Subjects With Non- Valvular Atrial Fibrillation | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1146/0 Primary endpoint: clinically relevant bleeding, •Laboratory marked abnormalities FU duration: 3 months phase 2 |
|
anticoagulant | rivaroxaban | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ROCKET (2nd prevention subgroup) , 2011 | rivaroxaban vs warfarin | | | thromboembolic event(cerebral or systemic) 0.98 [0.80; 1.19] thromboembolic event*(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic thromboembolic event) 0.98 [0.80; 1.19] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ROCKET (2nd prevention subgroup) , 2011 | rivaroxaban (n=3892) vs. warfarin INR 2-3 (n=3875) | patients with a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 3892/3875 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
anticoagulant | warfarin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 6 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
CAFA, 1991 | warfarin standard dose vs placebo | | | thrombo-embolic event (central or systemic)and fatal or intracranial hemorrhage 0.74 [0.31; 1.81] non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.74 [0.31; 1.81] vascular death 1.53 [0.56; 4.22] major bleeding 5.11 [0.60; 43.30] fatal bleeding ∞ [NaN; ∞] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.56 [0.21; 1.48] ischemic stroke 0.57 [0.19; 1.66] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.56 [0.21; 1.48] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.68 [0.25; 1.88] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.51 [0.05; 5.58] | AFASAK (warfarin standard dose vs control), 1989 | warfarin standard dose vs control | vascular death 0.20 [0.06; 0.69] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.44 [0.22; 0.88] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.44 [0.22; 0.88] | | major bleeding ∞ [NaN; ∞] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) ∞ [NaN; ∞] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.48 [0.22; 1.03] | BAATAF (warfarin vs no treatment), 1990 | warfarin low dose vs control | all death 0.42 [0.21; 0.82] ischemic stroke 0.15 [0.03; 0.66] | | major bleeding 1.96 [0.18; 21.48] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) NaN [NaN; NaN] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.00 [0.00; NaN] fatal bleeding 0.98 [0.06; 15.58] | SPAF (warfarin standard dose), 1991 | warfarin standard dose vs control | thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.33 [0.14; 0.83] ischemic stroke 0.35 [0.14; 0.88] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.33 [0.14; 0.83] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.42 [0.19; 0.94] | | all death 0.75 [0.27; 2.13] vascular death 0.57 [0.17; 1.93] major bleeding 1.00 [0.25; 3.96] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) ∞ [NaN; ∞] fatal bleeding ∞ [NaN; ∞] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | SPINAF (warfarin vs placebo), 1992 | warfarin low dose vs placebo | | | fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 1.02 [0.06; 16.21] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.57 [0.26; 1.27] | SAFT(warfarin low dose + aspirin vs no treatment), 2003 | warfarin low dose + aspirin vs control | | | all death 0.86 [0.55; 1.36] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 1.00 [0.14; 7.06] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 1.75 [0.52; 5.92] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 1.00 [0.29; 3.42] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CAFA, 1991 | warfarin standard dose (target INR 2-3) (n=187) vs. placebo (n=191) | non rheumatic atrial fibrillation | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 187/191 Primary endpoint: nonlacunar stroke,noncentral nervous systemic embolism and fatal or intracranial hemorrhage FU duration: 15.2 months There was in each center an unblinded anticoagulation supervisor who received the PT and regulated the warfarin doses to maintain INR btw 2-3.For patients given placebo the PT were ignored but the dose of medication was modified according to a series of sequential sham PT .
Five randomized patients did not have AF(2 in warfarin group and 3 in placebo group), were judged ineligible and have not been included in the analysis.No event occured to these patients.The number of lost to follow up was not given.
Early permanent discontinuation of the study medication not due to a primary outcome event occured in 26.2% warfarin treated patients and 22.5% placebo-treated patients.
| AFASAK (warfarin standard dose vs control), 1989 | warfarin standard dose(target INR:2.8-4.2) (n=335) vs. control (n=336) The AFASAK study compared 3 different treatments:aspirin, warfarin and placebo. | chronic non rheumatic AF | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 335/336 Primary endpoint: thrombo-embolic complication FU duration: 2 years The number of lost to follow up is not given.
| BAATAF (warfarin vs no treatment), 1990 | warfarin low dose (target INR:1.5-2.7) (n=212) vs. no placebo.people received no treatment but could choose to take aspirin. (n=208) | non rheumatic AF 9 patients were excluded after randomization. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 212/208 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke FU duration: 2.2 years | SPAF (warfarin standard dose), 1991 | warfarin standard dose(target INR:2.0-4.5) (n=210) vs. control (n=211) The SPAF study compared 3 treatments: warfarin,aspirin and placebo.
2 groups were considered:
-G1: in which patients received either warfarin,aspirin or placebo
-G2: in which patients received either aspirin or placebo(these patients were uneligible to take warfarin)
No analysis was made between warfarin and aspirin.
Warfarin is compared only with the G1 placebo.
| Patients with history of stroke or TIA more than 2 years before entry were elgible(7% of patients).So,it is mostly a primary prevention trial but not only. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 210/211 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 1.3 years | SPINAF (warfarin vs placebo), 1992 | warfarin low dose(target INR 1.4-2.8) (n=260) vs. placebo (n=265) The first 12 weeks constituted a medication induction period .Only patients who reached a baseline PT in the normal range were included in the study. | men ,with chronic nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 260/265 Primary endpoint: cerebral infarction FU duration: 1.75 years To maintain blinding,adjustment were made in the dose of placebo according to randomly assigned prearranged schedules.
13 patients were excluded after randomization.
There are 19 lost to follow up(12 in placebo group,7 in warfarin group).
The datas on patients lost to follow up were censored at the time of their last study visit.
55 patients withdrew from the study at their own request:data on these patients were censored at the time of their last visit.
| SAFT(warfarin low dose + aspirin vs no treatment), 2003 | warfarin low dose (1.25 mg/d) + aspirin 75 mg/d (n=334) vs. no treatment (n=334) | Low-medium risk patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 334/334 Primary endpoint: stroke FU duration: 33 months |
|
anticoagulant | warfarin | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy warfarin + aspirin inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* in SPAF III, 1996 warfarin + aspirin inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) in SPAF III, 1996 | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AFASAK II (warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.19 [0.57; 2.49] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.53 [0.44; 5.31] | AFASAK II (warfarin low dose+aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | warfarin + aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.99 [0.46; 2.15] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.99 [0.61; 6.48] | SPAF III, 1996 | warfarin + aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.79 [1.22; 2.63] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 4.02 [2.10; 7.69] | | MWNAF, 1998 | warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.70 [0.63; 4.56] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) ∞ [NaN; ∞] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AFASAK II (warfarin low dose vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | warfarin fixed low dose (1.25 mg/d) (n=167) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2-3) (n=170) The trial includes 4 arms:fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d),fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d)+ aspirin 300mg,aspirin 300 mg and conventional warfarin therapy(target INR 2-3).
The protocol allows 4 weeks per year without study treatment. | chronic non valvular atrial fibrillation | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 167/170 Primary endpoint: all stroke or systemic thromboembolic event FU duration: 3.5 years Mean follow-up duration was not reported.
The discontinuation of study treatment was reported globally(25.1% for reasons other than primary or secondary adverse events).Though the primary analysis of the study was made according to an "on treatment" approach ,an "intention to treat" analysis was performed for thrombo-embolic events to allow comparison with other studies.
| AFASAK II (warfarin low dose+aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | warfarin fixed low dose(1.25mg/d) + aspirin(300mg/d) (n=171) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2.0-3.0) (n=170) The trial includes 4 arms:fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d),fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d)+ aspirin 300mg,aspirin 300 mg and conventional warfarin therapy(target INR 2-3).
The protocol allows 4 weeks per year without study treatment. | chronic non valvular atrial fibrillation | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 171/170 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic thromboembolic event FU duration: 3.5 years Mean follow-up duration was not reported.
The discontinuation of study treatment was reported globally(25.1% for reasons other than primary or secondary adverse events).
Though the primary analysis of the study was made according to an "on treatment" approach ,an "intention to treat" analysis was performed for thrombo-embolic events to allow comparison with other studies.
| SPAF III, 1996 | warfarin low dose(target INR 1.2-1.5)+ aspirin 325 mg/d (n=521) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2.0-3.0) (n=523) | non rheumatic atrial fibrillation,patients with at least one additional thromboembolic risk factor(high risk patients) 36%(warfarin arm) and 40%(warfarin + aspirin arm)of patients had a history of previous embolism, so it was not only a primary prevention trial. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 521/523 Primary endpoint: ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 1.1 years 72 patients were withdrawn from study treatment but still followed up for the intention to treat analysis.
The hypothesis put forward was to show that combined therapy was as efficacious as adjusted dose warfarin, but no threshold is specified. | MWNAF, 1998 | warfarin low dose (1.25mg/d) (n=150) vs. warfarin standard dose( target INR 2.0-3.0) (n=153) | Patients over 60 with non rheumatic atrial fibrillation | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 150/153 Primary endpoint: thromboembolic event,cerebral or fatal bleeding and vascular death FU duration: 14.5 months Withdrawal from study treatment is reported here only unrelated to primary or secondary endpoints. |
|
antiplatelets drug | aspirin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AFASAK (aspirin vs placebo), 1989 | aspirin vs placebo | | | vascular death 0.80 [0.38; 1.68] major bleeding ∞ [NaN; ∞] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) NaN [NaN; NaN] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.84 [0.48; 1.47] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.84 [0.48; 1.47] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.84 [0.44; 1.61] | LASAF(aspirin vs no treatment), 1999 | aspirin vs control | | | | SPAF (aspirin,warfarin ineligible arm), 1991 | aspirin vs placebo | | | thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.92 [0.55; 1.55] | SPAF (aspirin , warfarin eligible arm), 1991 | aspirin vs placebo | thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.06 [0.01; 0.42] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AFASAK (aspirin vs placebo), 1989 | aspirin 75 mg/d
(n=336) vs. placebo (n=336) The AFASAK study compared 3 different treatments:aspirin, warfarin and placebo. | patients with chronic non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation | Double aveugle Parallel groups Sample size: 336/336 Primary endpoint: thrombo-embolic complication FU duration: 2 years The number of lost to follow up is not given.
| LASAF(aspirin vs no treatment), 1999 | aspirin:125mg/day(group A1);125mg on alternate days(group A2)
(n=-9) vs. no control treatment(group C) (n=-9) | | Open Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | SPAF (aspirin,warfarin ineligible arm), 1991 | aspirin 325mg/d
(n=346) vs. placebo (n=357) The SPAF study compared 3 treatments :warfarin,aspirin and placebo.
2 groups were considered:
-G1: in which patients received either warfarin,aspirin or placebo
-G2: in which patients received either aspirin or placebo(these patients were uneligible to take warfarin)
No analysis was made between warfarin and aspirin.
All patients under aspirin were compared to all patients under placebo(G1+G2)
| nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation, warfarin ineligible patients Patients with history of stroke or TIA more than 2 years before entry were eligible(7% of patients).So,it is mainly a primary prevention trial. | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 346/357 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 1.3 years | SPAF (aspirin , warfarin eligible arm), 1991 | aspirin 325mg/d
(n=206) vs. placebo (n=211) The SPAF study compared 3 treatments :warfarin,aspirin and placebo.
2 groups were considered:
-G1: in which patients received either warfarin,aspirin or placebo
-G2: in which patients received either aspirin or placebo(these patients were uneligible to take warfarin)
No analysis was made between warfarin and aspirin.
All patients under aspirin were compared to all patients under placebo(G1+G2)
| nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation,warfarin eligible patients Patients with history of stroke or TIA more than 2 years before entry were eligible(7% of patients).So,it is mostly a primary prevention trial but not only. | Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 206/211 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 1.3 years |
|
antiplatelets drug | aspirin | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 7 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PATAF (vs coumadin low dose), 1999 | aspirin vs coumadin low dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.03 [0.72; 1.48] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.26 [0.68; 2.33] | AFASAK II (aspirin vs warfarin low dose), 1998 | aspirin vs warfarin low dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.71 [0.32; 1.54] all death 2.31 [0.91; 5.86] vascular death 1.32 [0.30; 5.80] major bleeding 1.65 [0.40; 6.78] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) ∞ [NaN; ∞] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.99 [0.14; 6.93] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.82 [0.26; 2.65] ischemic stroke 0.82 [0.26; 2.65] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.82 [0.26; 2.65] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.64 [0.28; 1.43] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.99 [0.06; 15.67] | SPAF II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose, age<75), 1994 | aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.25 [0.81; 1.95] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) ∞ [NaN; ∞] non fatal stroke 1.31 [0.65; 2.66] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.50 [0.78; 2.91] | AFASAK II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.84 [0.37; 1.89] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) ∞ [NaN; ∞] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.26 [0.34; 4.60] | PATAF (vs coumadin standard dose), 1999 | aspirin vs coumadin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.11 [0.50; 2.49] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) ∞ [NaN; ∞] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.55 [0.38; 6.35] | SPAF II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose, age>75), 1994 | aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.98 [0.60; 1.58] non fatal stroke 1.40 [0.68; 2.87] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.35 [0.69; 2.63] | AFASAK (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1989 | aspirin vs warfarin standard dose | | | thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.90 [0.93; 3.89] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PATAF (vs coumadin low dose), 1999 | aspirin 300mg/d (n=319) vs. coumarin low dose(target INR 1.1-1.6 ) (n=279) The PATAF trial includes 2 strata:
-patients eligible for standard intensity coumarin:randomly assigned to standard anticoagulation(INR 2.5-3.5),very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d).
-patients ineligible for standard anticoagulation:randomly assigned to very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d). | non rheumatic AF,recruited in general practice,with no established indication for anticoagulation. We took all patients who were given aspirin (strate 1+2) and all patients on low dose anticoagulation(strate 1+2). | Simple aveugle Parallel groups Sample size: 319/279 Primary endpoint: stroke,systemic embolism,major haemorrhage and vascular death FU duration: 2.7 years The study was carried out to show that aspirin is equivalent to warfarin, but the methodology used was inappropriate.The study team conducted an intention to treat analysis and assumed they could conclude to equivalence if no significant difference was found between treatments at the end of the study.But this hypothesis is wrong :if no difference has been found,no conclusion is possible,and particularly, equivalence can't be proven. | AFASAK II (aspirin vs warfarin low dose), 1998 | aspirin 300 mg/d (n=169) vs. warfarin low dose (1.25mg/d) (n=167) The trial includes 4 arms: fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d),fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d)+ aspirin 300mg,aspirin 300 mg and conventional warfarin therapy(target INR 2-3).
The protocol allows 4 weeks per year without study treatment. | chronic non valvular atrial fibrillation | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 169/167 Primary endpoint: all stroke or systemic thromboembolic event FU duration: 3.5 years Mean follow-up duration was not reported.
The discontinuation of study treatment was reported globally(25.1% for reasons other than primary or secondary adverse events).
Though the primary analysis of the study was made according to an "on treatment" approach ,an "intention to treat" analysis was performed for thrombo-embolic events to allow comparison with other studies.
| SPAF II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose, age<75), 1994 | aspirin 325 mg/d (n=357) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2.0-4.5) (n=358) | non rheumatic atrial fibrillation,medium to high risk patients.
Patients aged 75 and less. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 357/358 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 3.1 years Randomisation was not centralized.
61.9%(681) patients of this study are stemming from the SPAF I study:416 had been assigned to warfarin or aspirin in the warfarin eligible group and have been included without rerandomization in SPAF II(patients aged 75 and less' strate);265 had been assigned mostly to placebo and have been rerandomized to get either aspirin or warfarin.
The withdrawals from trial are not reported. | AFASAK II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1998 | aspirin 300 mg/d (n=169) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2-3) (n=170) The trial includes 4 arms:fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d),fixed low dose warfarin (1.25mg/d)+ aspirin 300mg,aspirin 300 mg and conventional warfarin therapy(target INR 2-3).
The protocol allows 4 weeks per year without study treatment. | chronic non valvular atrial fibrillation | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 169/170 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic thromboembolic event FU duration: 3.5 years Mean follow-up duration was not reported.
The discontinuation of study treatment was reported globally(25.1% for reasons other than primary or secondary adverse events).Though the primary analysis of the study was made according to an "on treatment" approach ,an "intention to treat" analysis was performed for thrombo-embolic events to allow comparison with other studies.
| PATAF (vs coumadin standard dose), 1999 | aspirin 150mg/d (n=141) vs. coumarin standard dose(target INR 2.5-3.5) (n=131) The PATAF trial includes 2 strata:
-patients eligible for standard intensity coumarin:randomly assigned to standard anticoagulation(INR 2.5-3.5),very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d).
-patients ineligible for standard anticoagulation:randomly assigned to very low intensity anticoagulation(INR 1.1-1.6) or aspirin(150mg/d). | non rheumatic AF,recruited in general practice,with no established indication for anticoagulation. | Simple aveugle Parallel groups Sample size: 141/131 Primary endpoint: stroke,systemic embolism,major haemorrhage and vascular death FU duration: 2.7 years The study was carried out to show that aspirin is equivalent to warfarin, but the methodology used was inappropriate.The study team conducted an intention to treat analysis and assumed they could conclude to equivalence if no significant difference was found between treatments at the end of the study.But this hypothesis is wrong :if no difference has been found,no conclusion is possible,and particularly, equivalence can't be proven. | SPAF II (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose, age>75), 1994 | aspirin 325 mg/d (n=188) vs. warfarin standard dose (target INR 2.0-4.5) (n=197) | Non rheumatic atrial fibrillation,medium to high risk patients.Patients aged more than 75. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 188/197 Primary endpoint: ischemic stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 2.0 years Randomization was not centralized.
61.9%(681) patients of this study are stemming from the SPAF I study:416 had been assigned to warfarin or aspirin in the warfarin eligible group and have been included without rerandomization in SPAF II(patients aged 75 and less' strate);265 had been assigned mostly to placebo and have been rerandomized to get either aspirin or warfarin.
The withdrawals from trial are not reported. | AFASAK (aspirin vs warfarin standard dose), 1989 | aspirin (low dose 75 mg) (n=336) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2.8-4.2) (n=335) The AFASAK study compared 3 different treatments:aspirin, warfarin and placebo. | chronic non rheumatic AF | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 336/335 Primary endpoint: thrombo-embolic complication FU duration: 2 years The number of lost to follow up is not given.
There is a high number of withdrawn patients, even higher in the warfarin arm(38% for warfarin,13% for aspirin,15% for placebo)).
|
|
antiplatelets drug | clopidogrel | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy aspirin + clopidogrel inferior to anticoagulant in terms of non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* in ACTIVE W, 2006 aspirin + clopidogrel inferior to anticoagulant in terms of thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) in ACTIVE W, 2006 aspirin + clopidogrel inferior to anticoagulant in terms of ischemic stroke in ACTIVE W, 2006 aspirin + clopidogrel inferior to anticoagulant in terms of All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) in ACTIVE W, 2006 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ACTIVE W, 2006 | aspirin + clopidogrel vs anticoagulant | haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.34 [0.12; 0.93] | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.39 [1.18; 1.64] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 1.43 [1.18; 1.74] ischemic stroke 2.17 [1.51; 3.11] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 1.71 [1.25; 2.36] | all death 1.02 [0.82; 1.26] vascular death 1.14 [0.89; 1.48] major bleeding 1.10 [0.83; 1.45] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.94 [0.46; 1.95] fatal bleeding 0.64 [0.25; 1.66] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ACTIVE W, 2006 | clopidogrel (75 mg per day) plus aspirin (75–100 mg per day) (n=3335) vs. oral anticoagulation therapy (target international normalised ratio of 2·0–3·0) (n=3371) | Patients with atrial fibrillation plus one or more risk factor for stroke | open Parallel groups Sample size: 3335/3371 Primary endpoint: stroke, non-CNS systemic embolus FU duration: 1.28 y (median) |
|
antiplatelets drug | triflusal | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
NASPEAF (triflusal vs coumadin standard dose)), 2004 | triflusal vs coumadin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.45 [0.77; 2.72] non fatal stroke 3.29 [0.92; 11.81] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 2.12 [0.88; 5.09] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
NASPEAF (triflusal vs coumadin standard dose)), 2004 | Triflusal 600 mg/d (n=242) vs. coumadin standard dose(target INR 2-3) (n=237) | Non valvular atrial fibrillation.
Intermediate risk patients. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 242/237 Primary endpoint: vascular death,TIA,nonfatal stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 2.76 years Withdrawals from study treatments are not reported separetely:9% were withdrawn for adverse events without significant difference among groups,9.3% were withdrawn secondary to gp or patient's decision. |
|
antithrombotics | idraparinux | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy idraparinux inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of major bleeding in AMADEUS, 2008 idraparinux inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of fatal bleeding in AMADEUS, 2008 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AMADEUS, 2008 | idraparinux vs warfarin standard dose | | major bleeding 2.67 [1.74; 4.08] fatal bleeding 7.14 [1.61; 31.58] | all death 1.12 [0.79; 1.58] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.00 [0.00; NaN] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.73 [0.40; 1.32] ischemic stroke 0.71 [0.36; 1.43] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.73 [0.40; 1.32] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.00 [0.00; NaN] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AMADEUS, 2008 | subcutaneous idraparinux 2·5 mg weekly (n=2283) vs. adjusted-dose vitamin K antagonists (target of an international
normalised ratio of 2–3) (n=2293) | patients with atrial fi brillation at risk for thromboembolism | open Parallel groups Sample size: 2283/2293 Primary endpoint: all stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 10.7 months |
|
catheter ablation | catheter ablation | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 11 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
A4 (Jais), 2008 | catheter ablation vs control | Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 11.13 [4.27; 29.03] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 11.13 [4.27; 29.03] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 11.13 [4.27; 29.03] | | death 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | Wazni , 2005 | catheter ablation vs control | atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 4.22 [2.14; 8.32] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 2.36 [1.50; 3.70] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 2.09 [1.38; 3.17] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 2.17 [1.44; 3.27] | | death NaN [NaN; NaN] adverse clinical event 1.09 [0.30; 4.01] | APAF (Pappone), 2006 | catheter ablation vs control | adverse clinical event 0.22 [0.09; 0.55] atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 3.86 [2.65; 5.63] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 2.43 [1.84; 3.21] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 2.43 [1.84; 3.21] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 1.38 [1.22; 1.56] | | death NaN [NaN; NaN] | CAFCOAF (Stabile), 2006 | catheter ablation vs control | atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 6.43 [2.91; 14.21] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 9.14 [3.44; 24.23] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 6.09 [2.74; 13.51] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 6.43 [2.91; 14.21] | | death 0.51 [0.05; 5.47] adverse clinical event 0.76 [0.18; 3.27] | Krittayaphong, 2003 | catheter ablation vs control | atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 2.00 [1.02; 3.91] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 2.00 [1.02; 3.91] | | death NaN [NaN; NaN] adverse clinical event 0.71 [0.29; 1.75] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 1.96 [1.00; 3.87] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 1.83 [0.92; 3.66] | ThermoCool AF, 2008 | catheter ablation vs control | atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 3.20 [1.71; 6.00] Symptomatic Atrial Arrhythmia 0.24 [0.15; 0.39] Any Atrial Arrhythmia 0.29 [0.18; 0.46] | | death ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Oral, 2006 | catheter ablation vs control | Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 17.03 [5.59; 51.90] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 17.03 [5.59; 51.90] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 1.28 [1.00; 1.62] | | death ∞ [NaN; ∞] | Forleo, 2009 | catheter ablation vs control | atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence free survival 1.87 [1.23; 2.83] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months per protocol 1.87 [1.23; 2.83] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months worst case 1.87 [1.23; 2.83] Freedom from arrhythmia at 12 months ITT 1.87 [1.23; 2.83] | | death NaN [NaN; NaN] | Lakkireddy, 2006 | catheter ablation vs control | | | | CABANA, 2018 | catheter ablation vs control | AF recurrence 0.53 [0.46; 0.61] death or CV hospitalization, 0.83 [0.74; 0.93] | | net benefit 0.86 [0.65; 1.14] death 0.85 [0.60; 1.21] death, stroke,stroke, serious bleeding, cardiac arrest 0.86 [0.65; 1.14] | STOP-AF, 2010 | catheter ablation vs control | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
A4 (Jais), 2008 | catheter ablation (n=53) vs. antiarrhythmic drugs (n=59) | patients with paroxysmal AF resistant to at least 1 antiarrhythmic drug. | open Parallel groups Sample size: 53/59 Primary endpoint: none defined FU duration: 12 months | Wazni , 2005 | Pulmonary vein isolation (n=32) vs. Flecainide, propafenone, or sotalol; amiodarone if needed (n=35) | Drug-naive monthly symptomatic AF >=3mo | open Parallel groups Sample size: 32/35 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | APAF (Pappone), 2006 | left atrial catheter ablation (n=99) vs. Flecainide acetate, propafenone hydrochloride, or sotalol hydrochloride (n=99) | Drug-refractory paroxysmal AF >=6mo | open Parallel groups Sample size: 99/99 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | CAFCOAF (Stabile), 2006 | left atrial catheter ablation plus amiodarone or other drugs (n=68) vs. Amiodarone or other drugs (n=69) | Drug-refractory or drug-intolerant paroxysmal or persistent AF | open blinded assessment Parallel groups Sample size: 68/69 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Krittayaphong, 2003 | left atrial catheter ablation (n=15) vs. amiodarone (n=15) | drug-refractory amiodarone-naive paroxysmal or persistent AF >=6mo | open Sample size: 15/15 Primary endpoint: sinus rhythm FU duration: 12 months | ThermoCool AF, 2008 | catheter ablation (n=106) vs. antiarrhythmic drug therapy with a class I or III drug (n=61) | patients with AF who were nonresponsive to previous treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs | open Parallel groups Sample size: 106/61 Primary endpoint: treatment failure FU duration: 9 months | Oral, 2006 | circumferential pulmonary-vein ablation and amiodarione (n=77) vs. amiodarone and two cardioversions during the first three months alone (n=69) | patients with chronic atrial fibrillation | open Parallel groups Sample size: 77/69 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Forleo, 2009 | pulmonary vein isolation (n=35) vs. antiarrhythmic drug treatment (n=35) | patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 and paroxysmal or persistent AF | open Parallel groups Sample size: 35/35 Primary endpoint: first AF recurrence FU duration: 12 months | Lakkireddy, 2006 | (n=138) vs. (n=139) | | Parallel groups Sample size: 138/139 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | CABANA, 2018 | left atrial catheter ablation (n=2204) vs. current state-of-the-art therapy with either rate control or rhythm control drugs (n=0) | patients with untreated or incompletely treated AF | open Parallel groups Sample size: 2204/0 Primary endpoint: all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest FU duration: | STOP-AF, 2010 | cryo-balloon catheter for pulmonary vein isolation (n=163) vs. nonfailed antiarrhythmic drugs (n=82) | patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation | open Parallel groups Sample size: 163/82 Primary endpoint: treatment succes FU duration: 12 mo |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | apixaban | versus anticoagulant apixaban superior to warfarin standard dose in terms of all death in ARISTOTLE, 2011 apixaban superior to warfarin standard dose in terms of major bleeding in ARISTOTLE, 2011 apixaban superior to warfarin standard dose in terms of thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) in ARISTOTLE, 2011 | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ARISTOTLE, 2011 | apixaban vs warfarin standard dose | all death 0.89 [0.81; 0.98] Demonstrated major bleeding 0.70 [0.61; 0.81] Demonstrated thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.80 [0.67; 0.95] Demonstrated thrombo-embolic event (central or systemic)and fatal or intracranial hemorrhage 0.78 [0.70; 0.87] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.51 [0.35; 0.75] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.79 [0.66; 0.95] major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding 0.70 [0.63; 0.77] | | coronary events 0.88 [0.66; 1.17] ischemic stroke 0.92 [0.75; 1.14] Gastrointestinal major bleeding 0.88 [0.68; 1.14] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.88 [0.44; 1.76] | phase 2 apixaban | apixaban vs warfarin standard dose | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ARISTOTLE, 2011 | apixaban 5mg twice daily
(n=9120) vs. warfarin adjusted for an INR between 2 and 3
(n=9081)
| subjects with atrial fibrillation and risk factors for stroke
| double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 9120/9081 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 1.8 yrs (median)
| phase 2 apixaban | apixaban 5 or 2.5 mg twice daily (n=222) vs. warfarin (n=0) | patient with non valvular AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 222/0 Primary endpoint: major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding FU duration: 12 weeks phase 2 |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | apixaban | versus antiplatelet drugs No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
AVERROES, 2011 | apixaban vs aspirin | vascular death,TIA,nonfatal stroke or systemic embolism 0.66 [0.53; 0.83] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.46 [0.33; 0.64] ischemic stroke 0.37 [0.25; 0.55] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.46 [0.33; 0.65] | | all death 0.79 [0.62; 1.01] coronary events 0.85 [0.50; 1.47] vascular death 0.86 [0.64; 1.16] major bleeding 1.14 [0.74; 1.75] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.66 [0.24; 1.86] fatal bleeding 0.84 [0.26; 2.72] Gastrointestinal major bleeding 0.85 [0.39; 1.84] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
AVERROES, 2011 | apixaban 5 mg (or 2.5 mg) twice daily (n=2808) vs. aspirin 81-324 md daily (n=2791) | patients with atrial fibrillation who have failed or are unsuitable for vitamin K antagonist treatment | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2808/2791 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: maximum 21 months |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | dabigatran | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
RE-LY (110mg), 2009 | dabigatran 110mg vs warfarin standard dose | major bleeding 0.80 [0.69; 0.93] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.31 [0.17; 0.56] Life threatening major bleeding 0.68 [0.56; 0.84] | | all death 0.91 [0.80; 1.03] vascular death 0.90 [0.77; 1.06] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.95 [0.74; 1.23] non fatal stroke 0.87 [0.62; 1.23] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.91 [0.74; 1.11] ischemic stroke 1.11 [0.89; 1.39] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.92 [0.75; 1.12] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.92 [0.74; 1.14] Gastrointestinal major bleeding 1.11 [0.87; 1.42] Non–life threatening Major bleeding 0.95 [0.79; 1.15] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.79 [0.36; 1.73] | phase 2 dabigatran | dabigatran vs warfarin standard dose | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
RE-LY (110mg), 2009 | dabigatran 110 mg twice a day
(n=6015) vs. warfarin adjusted dose to a 2-3 INR (n=6022) 3 arms: dabigatran 110 mg, 150mg and warfarin
| Patients With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation
| open (blind assessment) Parallel groups Sample size: 6015/6022 Primary endpoint: stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 2 y (median)
| phase 2 dabigatran | Dabigatran 110, 220, 300 mg twice daily (n=-9) vs. warfarin (n=-9) | patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (paroxysmal, persistent or permanent) | open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: major bleeding event, , FU duration: |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | edoxaban | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy edoxaban high dose inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of Gastrointestinal major bleeding in ENGAGE-AF TIMI 48 High dose, 2013 | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ENGAGE-AF TIMI 48 High dose, 2013 | edoxaban high dose vs warfarin standard dose | vascular death 0.86 [0.77; 0.97] major bleeding 0.80 [0.71; 0.91] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.47 [0.35; 0.64] fatal bleeding 0.55 [0.36; 0.84] Life threatening major bleeding 0.51 [0.38; 0.69] major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding 0.86 [0.80; 0.92] | Gastrointestinal major bleeding 1.23 [1.01; 1.49] | all death 0.92 [0.83; 1.01] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.92 [0.68; 1.25] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.87 [0.73; 1.04] ischemic stroke 1.00 [0.84; 1.20] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.88 [0.75; 1.03] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.65 [0.34; 1.24] | phase 2 edoxaban | edoxaban vs warfarin standard dose | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ENGAGE-AF TIMI 48 High dose, 2013 | edoxaban 60mg once daily (n=7035) vs. warfarin (INR 2-3) (n=7036) a third arm received a low dose of edoxaban, 30mg.
The allocated dose was halved if any of the
following characteristics were present at the time
of randomization or during the study: estimated
creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute,
a body weight of 60 kg or less, or the concomitant
use of verapamil or quinidine (potent
P-glycoprotein inhibitors) | AF patients (CHADS2 >=2) | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 7035/7036 Primary endpoint: stroke, systemic embolic events and all-cause mortality FU duration: 2.8 years | phase 2 edoxaban | edoxaban (DU-176b) (n=-9) vs. warfarin (n=-9) | male and female subjects aged 18 to 80 years, inclusive, with non-valvular AF and a CHADS2 Score of at least 1 | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: all bleeding FU duration: |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | rivaroxaban | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy rivaroxaban inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of Gastrointestinal major bleeding in ROCKET-AF, 2010 | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ROCKET-AF, 2010 | rivaroxaban vs warfarin standard dose | haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.58 [0.38; 0.89] fatal bleeding 0.50 [0.31; 0.80] Life threatening major bleeding 0.69 [0.53; 0.89] | Gastrointestinal major bleeding 1.46 [1.19; 1.78] | vascular death,TIA,nonfatal stroke or systemic embolism 0.94 [0.84; 1.05] all death 0.92 [0.82; 1.03] coronary events 0.80 [0.62; 1.04] vascular death 0.94 [0.81; 1.09] major bleeding 1.04 [0.90; 1.20] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 0.70 [0.49; 1.02] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.88 [0.75; 1.04] ischemic stroke 0.99 [0.82; 1.20] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.84 [0.69; 1.01] major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding 1.03 [0.96; 1.11] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 0.74 [0.42; 1.31] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ROCKET-AF, 2010 | Rivaroxaban 20mg p.o. once daily (n=7131) vs. Warfarin p.o. once daily titrated to a target INR of 2.5 (range 2.0 to 3.0, inclusive) (n=7133) | Subjects With Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 7131/7133 Primary endpoint: stroke or non-CNS systemic embolism FU duration: median 1.94 y |
|
direct oral anticoagulant (DAO) | ximelagatran | versus anticoagulant No demonstrated result for efficacy ximelagatran inferior to warfarin standard dose in terms of hypertransaminasemia in SPORTIF V, 2005 | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
SPORTIF II (ximelagatran vs warfarin standard dose), 2002 | ximelagatran vs warfarin standard dose | | | | SPORTIF III, 2003 | ximelagatran vs warfarin standard dose | | | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 0.71 [0.48; 1.07] all death 0.99 [0.73; 1.34] coronary events 1.85 [0.94; 3.61] vascular death 1.21 [0.77; 1.91] major bleeding 0.71 [0.44; 1.13] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 0.44 [0.14; 1.44] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 1.11 [0.45; 2.73] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 0.71 [0.48; 1.07] ischemic stroke 0.70 [0.45; 1.09] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 0.70 [0.45; 1.09] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 0.67 [0.44; 1.01] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 2.00 [0.37; 10.90] | SPORTIF V, 2005 | ximelagatran vs warfarin standard dose | | hypertransaminasemia 7.81 [4.58; 13.32] | non fatal TE events,bleedings and vascular death* 1.38 [0.91; 2.10] all death 0.94 [0.74; 1.21] coronary events 0.70 [0.43; 1.16] major bleeding 0.75 [0.54; 1.03] haemorragic stroke(or intracerebral hemorrhage) 1.00 [0.14; 7.10] fatal stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic) 3.34 [0.92; 12.11] thrombo-embolic event (cerebral or systemic) 1.38 [0.91; 2.10] ischemic stroke 1.25 [0.81; 1.93] thromboembolic event likes(TE event or ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) 1.25 [0.81; 1.93] All stroke(ischemic+hemorrhagic/fatal+non fatal) 1.24 [0.81; 1.89] systemic thrombo-embolic complication 6.01 [0.72; 49.84] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
SPORTIF II (ximelagatran vs warfarin standard dose), 2002 | ximelegatran 20,40,60 mg twice daily (n=187) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2-3) (n=67) -treatment with either NSAI agents or fibrinolytic agents within the week before the start was prohibited
-patient previously receiving warfarin were given ximelegatran once INR value was 1.5 or under/after the end of the study patients who stopped ximelegatran began warfarin 12 to 24 h after last intake. | Medium to high risk patients with chronic non valvular atrial fibrillation. -SPORTIF II is a dose guiding study
-66 patient received 20mg,62 received 40mg,59 received 60 mg | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 187/67 Primary endpoint: Thrombo-embolic events and bleedings FU duration: 16 weeks it is a dose guiding study | SPORTIF III, 2003 | ximelagatran 36 mg twice daily (n=1704) vs. warfarin standard dose (target INR 2-3) (n=1703) Aspirin was used concurrently for at least half the period on study drug by 13% patients assigned to ximelagatran and 10% on warfarin(p=0.01). | One or more stroke risk factor in addition to AF.High risk patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation. | Open Parallel groups Sample size: 1704/1703 Primary endpoint: All stroke or systemic embolism FU duration: 17.4 months Premature termination of study treatment was the result of study endpoint (4% warfarin group,3% ximelegatran) and adverse effects(4% warfarin group,8% ximelegatran group:this difference is related to elevation of liver enzymes in some patients treated with ximelegatran).
The trial was a non inferiority trial but the primary analysis was only by intention to treat. | SPORTIF V, 2005 | ximelegatran 36 mg twice daily (n=1960) vs. warfarin standard dose(target INR 2-3) (n=1962) | One or more stroke risk factor in addition to atrial fibrillation.High risk patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation.
| Double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1960/1962 Primary endpoint: All stroke and systemic embolism FU duration: 20 months |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | atorvastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Almroth, 2009 | atorvastatin vs placebo | AF recurrence 0.62 [0.47; 0.81] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Almroth, 2009 | atorvastatin 80 mg daily (n=118) vs. placebo (n=116) | patients with persistent atrial fibrillation undergoing electrical cardioversion | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 118/116 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 patients were excluded after randomization |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | candesartan | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
CAPRAF (Tveit), 2007 | candesartan vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CAPRAF (Tveit), 2007 | candesartan 8 mg once daily for 3-6 weeks before and candesartan 16 mg once daily for 6 months after electrical cardioversion (n=86) vs. placebo (n=85) | patients undergoing electrical cardioversion for persistent AF | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 86/85 Primary endpoint: Recurrence of atrial fibrillation FU duration: 6 months |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | enalapril | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Ueng, 2003 | enalapril vs control | AF recurrence 0.60 [0.37; 0.97] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Ueng, 2003 | enalapril (n=70) vs. control (n=75) | atrial fibrillation | open Parallel groups Sample size: 70/75 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 270 days (range 61-575d) |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | irbesartan | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ACTIVE I, 2009 | irbesartan vs placebo | hospitalization for HF 0.87 [0.78; 0.98] | | cardiovascular events + HF hospitalization 0.95 [0.89; 1.02] vascular death 1.03 [0.93; 1.13] stroke/MI/vascular death 1.00 [0.92; 1.08] stroke 0.92 [0.81; 1.05] MI 1.05 [0.84; 1.33] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ACTIVE I, 2009 | irbesartan 300mg once daily (n=4518) vs. placebo (n=4498) | patients with atrial fibrillation and with a systolic blood pressure of at least 110 mmHg associated with at least one major risk of vascular events these patients were drawn from two parallel trials (ACTIVE-A and ACTIVE-W) utilizing a partial factorial design | double blind Factorial plan Sample size: 4518/4498 Primary endpoint: coprimary MACE, HF events FU duration: 4.1 years |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | irbesartan | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Madrid, 2002 | irbesartan vs control | AF recurrence 0.39 [0.19; 0.79] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Madrid, 2002 | irbesartan (n=79) vs. control (n=75) | atrial fibrillation | open Parallel groups Sample size: 79/75 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 254 d (range 60-710) |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | lisinopril | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Van den Burg, 1995 | lisinopril vs placebo | | | AF recurrence 0.45 [0.13; 1.57] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Van den Burg, 1995 | lisinopril (n=7) vs. placebo (n=11) | atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 7/11 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 84 days |
|
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) | valsartan | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
GISSI-AF (Disertori), 2009 | valsartan vs placebo | | | AF recurrence 0.99 [0.89; 1.09] more than 1 recurrence 0.96 [0.81; 1.14] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
GISSI-AF (Disertori), 2009 | valsartan (n=722) vs. placebo (n=720) | patients in sinus rhythm but with either two or more documented episodes of atrial fibrillation in the previous 6 months or successful cardioversion for atrial fibrillation in the previous 2 weeks
and with underlying cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or left atrial enlargement | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 722/720 Primary endpoint: AF recurrence FU duration: 1 year |
|
PPAR modulators | gemfibrozil | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
VA HIT (AF ancillary study), 1999 | gemfibrozil vs placebo | | | AF 1.07 [0.76; 1.51] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
VA HIT (AF ancillary study), 1999 | gemfibrozil (n=1070) vs. placebo (n=1060) | men with coronary heart disease, an HDL cholesterol level of 40 mg per deciliter (1.0 mmol per liter) or less, and an LDL cholesterol level of 140 mg per deciliter (3.6 mmol per liter) or less | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1070/1060 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 4.4 y |
|
statins | atorvastatin | versus placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ARMYDA-3 (AF ancillary study), 2006 | atorvastatin vs placebo | AF 0.61 [0.45; 0.84] | | | Chello, 2006 | atorvastatin vs placebo | | | AF 0.40 [0.09; 1.83] | MIRACL (AF ancillary study), 2001 | atorvastatin vs placebo | | | AF 1.10 [0.63; 1.93] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ARMYDA-3 (AF ancillary study), 2006 | atorvastatin 40mg daily (n=101) vs. placebo (n=99) | patients with scheduled cardiac surgery without history of AF | Sample size: 101/99 Primary endpoint: post-operative AF 5 min FU duration: 30 days | Chello, 2006 | atorvastatin 20mg daily (n=20) vs. placebo (n=20) | patients with scheduled coronary bypass surgery | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 20/20 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3 weeks | MIRACL (AF ancillary study), 2001 | atorvastatin 80mg daily (n=1421) vs. placebo (n=1440) | Acute coronary syndrome; subgroup without history of AF | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 1421/1440 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 16 weeks |
|
statins | atorvastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
MIRACL (sub-group) (Schwartz), 2004 | atorvastatin vs placebo | AF recurrence 0.73 [0.58; 0.91] | | | Ozaydin, 2006 | atorvastatin vs control | AF recurrence 0.27 [0.09; 0.86] | | | Dernellis, 2006 | atorvastatin vs placebo | AF recurrence 0.39 [0.25; 0.60] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
MIRACL (sub-group) (Schwartz), 2004 | atorvastatin 80 mg (n=118) vs. placebo (n=108) | Acute coronary syndrome | double blind Sample size: 118/108 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 16 weeks | Ozaydin, 2006 | atorvastatin 10 mg (n=24) vs. standard therapy (n=24) | Persistent AF and scheduled EC | open Sample size: 24/24 Primary endpoint: recurrence of AF FU duration: 3 months | Dernellis, 2006 | atorvastatin 20–40 mg (n=40) vs. placebo (n=40) | Paroxysmal AF with CRP between 0.8 and 13 mg/L | NA Sample size: 40/40 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 4–6 months |
|
statins | pravastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Tveit, 2004 | pravastatin vs control | | | AF recurrence 1.06 [0.62; 1.81] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Tveit, 2004 | pravastatin 40 mg (n=51) vs. standard therapy (n=51) | AF >48 h and scheduled EC | Sample size: 51/51 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 weeks |
|