Perioperative Safety and Efficacy of Different Anticoagulation Strategies With Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Pulmonary Vein Isolation: A Meta-Analysis

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted and interrupted direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) administration in patients undergoing pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Background: The optimal periprocedural management of DOACs in patients undergoing PVI is not well defined, and different strategies are used. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid/MEDLINE, and EMBASE was performed. Three strategies for periprocedural DOAC administration were considered: uninterrupted, mildly interrupted (<12 h), and interrupted (≥12 h). Primary endpoints were major bleeding (MB) and thromboembolic (TE) complications; pooled weighted mean incidence (WMI) was calculated using a random-effects model. A secondary endpoint was the WMI of overall bleeding (OB). Results: The analysis included 43 studies for a total of 8,362 patients. DOACs showed similar safety and efficacy in the 3 subgroups. The WMI of MB was 1.02%, 1.49%, and 1.17% for the uninterrupted, mildly interrupted, and interrupted strategy, respectively; the WMI of TE complications was 0.16%, 0.46%, and 0.49% for the uninterrupted, mildly interrupted, and interrupted strategy, respectively, with no heterogeneity. OB appeared to be higher in uninterrupted (6.33%) and mildly interrupted (8.62%) groups compared with the interrupted (3.53%), with substantial heterogeneity among studies. No interaction was found between the incidence of MB and TE complications and different DOACs. Conclusions: In patients undergoing PVI, these 3 anticoagulation strategies may have similar safety and efficacy in terms of MB and TE complications. OB appears to be higher in uninterrupted and mildly interrupted strategies compared with the interrupted strategy. No substantial differences were observed among DOACs regarding the incidence of MB and TE complications.