Safety and efficacy of NOAC vs. VKA in patients treated by PCI: a retrospective study of the FRANCE PCI registry

Abstract

IntroductionDual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) combining oral anticoagulation (OAC), preferentially Non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) and single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for a period of 6–12 months is recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an indication for OAC.ObjectiveTo compare outcomes between vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and NOAC-treated patients in the nation-wide France PCI registry.MethodsAll consecutive patients from the France PCI registry treated by PCI and discharged with OAC between 2014 and 2020 were included and followed one-year. Major bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classification ≥3 and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke. A propensity-score analysis was used.ResultsOf the 7,277 eligible participants, 2,432 (33.4%) were discharged on VKA and 4,845 (66.6%) on NOAC. After propensity-score adjustment, one-year major bleeding was less frequent in NOAC vs. VKA-treated participants [3.1% vs. 5.2%, −2.1% (−3.6% to −0.6%), p = 0.005 as well as the rate of MACE [9.2% vs. 11.9%, −2.7% (−5.0% to −0.4%), p = 0.02]. One-year mortality was also significantly decreased in NOAC vs. VKA-treated participants [7.4% vs. 9.9%, −2.6% (−4.7% to −0.5%), p = 0.02]. The area under ROC curves of the anticoagulant treatment propensity score was estimated at 0.93, suggesting potential indication biasConclusionsNOAC seems to have a better efficacy and safety profile than VKA. However, potential indication bias were found.