Comparison of Dabigatran Versus Warfarin Treatment for Prevention of New Cerebral Lesions in Valvular Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract

Warfarin is the standard anticoagulation therapy for valvular atrial fibrillation (AF); however, new oral anticoagulants have emerged as an alternative. We compared the efficacy and safety of dabigatran with conventional treatment in AF associated with left-sided valvular heart disease (VHD), including mitral stenosis (MS). Patients with AF and left-sided VHD were randomly assigned to receive dabigatran or conventional treatment. The primary end point was the occurrence of clinical stroke or a new brain lesion (silent brain infarct and microbleed) on 1-year follow-up brain magnetic resonance imaging. Patients in the dabigatran group were switched from warfarin (n = 52), antiplatelets alone (n = 5), or no therapy (n = 2) to dabigatran. In the conventional group, 53 used warfarin (including 42 MS patients), and 7 used antiplatelets. No death or clinical stroke event occurred in either group during follow-up. Silent brain infarct and microbleed occurred in 20 and 2 patients in the dabigatran group and 20 and 4 patients in the conventional treatment group. The incidence rate of the primary end point did not significantly differ between groups (34% vs 40%, relative risk 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.29, p = 0.491). The primary end point rate was similar between groups in 82 patients (40 in the dabigatran group and 42 in the conventional group) with MS (32% vs 34%, relative risk 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 1.50, p = 0.759). In conclusion, primary end point rates after treatment with dabigatran were similar to conventional treatment in patients with significant VHD and AF. New oral anticoagulants could be a reasonable alternative to warfarin in patients with AF and VHD, which should be confirmed in future large-scale studies.