Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

DOACs versus VKAs for left ventricular thrombus management in adults

DOACs versus VKAs for left ventricular thrombus management in adults
Photo by Trust "Tru" Katsande / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
DOACs may offer a safer alternative to VKAs for left ventricular thrombus, with similar efficacy and lower bleeding risk.

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in adults with imaging-confirmed left ventricular thrombus (LVT). The analysis pooled data from 29 studies, focusing on outcomes like LVT resolution, systemic embolic events, all-cause mortality, and bleeding.

For LVT resolution, DOAC therapy was associated with a numerically higher likelihood, but this did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98–1.14). There was no significant difference in the risk of systemic embolic events between DOACs and VKAs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78–1.03).

DOAC use was linked to a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64–1.09), though this finding was primarily driven by observational data. Bleeding events were also lower with DOACs, but not statistically significant (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72–1.03).

Limitations include the reliance on observational studies for mortality findings and the need for randomized trials to confirm optimal strategies. The authors conclude that DOACs are a reasonable and potentially safer alternative to VKAs for LVT management, though associations should be interpreted cautiously.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundLeft ventricular thrombus (LVT) is associated with substantial risk of embolism and mortality. Given the growing use of direct oral anticoagulants for LVT and evolving evidence, we conducted an updated, comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis comparing their effectiveness and safety with vitamin K antagonists.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through the most recent search date for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing DOACs with VKAs in adults with imaging-confirmed LVT. Outcomes of interest included LVT resolution, systemic embolic events, all-cause mortality, bleeding events, and composite clinical outcomes. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.ResultsA total of 29 studies, comprising randomized controlled trials and observational cohorts, were included. Compared with VKAs, DOAC therapy was associated with a numerically higher likelihood of LVT resolution, although this did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.98–1.14; I² = 48.2%). There was no significant difference in the risk of systemic embolic events between DOACs and VKAs (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.78–1.03; I² = 5.5%). DOAC use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64–1.09; I² = 5.5%); however, this finding was primarily driven by observational data. DOACs were also associated with a lower risk of bleeding events (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72–1.03; I² = 16.4%), although this did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsIn this updated meta-analysis, DOACs were associated with a numerically higher rate of LVT resolution, although this did not reach statistical significance, and with lower rates of bleeding compared with VKAs, without an increased risk of systemic embolic events. Although a lower risk of all-cause mortality was observed, this finding was primarily driven by observational studies and should be interpreted with caution. These findings support DOACs as a reasonable and potentially safer alternative to VKAs for the management of LVT, while emphasizing the need for adequately powered randomized trials to confirm optimal anticoagulation strategies in this population.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251181379, PROSPERO CRD420251181379.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.