edoxaban and Pericarditis

Anticoagulation could not be currently stopped even after successful thoracoscopic ablation of atrial fibrillation for at least 2 months. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy outcomes between a new oral anticoagulant and warfarin after thoracoscopic ablation. This trial was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled study comparing edoxaban and warfarin in patients undergoing thoracoscopic ablation of atrial fibrillation. This study enrolled 60 patients randomly assigned into 2 groups. The primary endpoint was efficacy outcomes, including stroke and systemic thromboembolic events. The secondary endpoint was safety outcomes including major bleeding and pericarditis. The patients were evaluated at discharge, 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. No stroke and thromboembolic events were noted in both treatment groups during the follow-up period. During the 6 months follow-up period, 4 (13%) of 30 patients in the edoxaban group experienced minor bleeding events, whereas none were noted in the warfarin group. Five anticoagulation-related events (bleeding, and prolongation of international normalized ratio), including pericarditis, were noted in both the edoxaban and warfarin groups. No statistically significant difference existed between the 2 groups. In conclusion, this study showed the comparable results of edoxaban to warfarin during the window period of post-thoracoscopic ablation of atrial fibrillation. Moreover, anticoagulation-related events were rather affected by patient factors and not by the anticoagulant type.

Topics: Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Hemorrhage; Humans; Pericarditis; Prospective Studies; Stroke; Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome; Vitamin K; Warfarin