ライフサイエンスコーパス: dabigatran

1 costly and less effective than warfarin and dabigatran.

2 erences in use, safety, and effectiveness of dabigatran.

3 a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage with dabigatran.

4 oped to reverse the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran.

5 associated with greater patient adherence to dabigatran.

6 jor bleeding when compared with warfarin and dabigatran.

7 nt, identifying 1775 on warfarin and 3370 on dabigatran.

8 initiated on VKA, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and dabigatran.

9 lant effect of the direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran.

10 independent of the pharmacologic effects of dabigatran.

11 ate and influence the safety and efficacy of dabigatran.

12 strointestinal bleeding among users naive to dabigatran.

13 loped to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran.

14 safely reversed the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran.

15 n antidote to rapidly reverse the effects of dabigatran.

16 r apixaban and rivaroxaban and <120 days for dabigatran.

17 vo that is induced by the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran.

18 higher gastrointestinal bleeding rates with dabigatran.

19 2-2.70]; and low-molecular-weight heparin vs dabigatran 0.67 [0.20-1.82]).

20 in IRR 0.78 [95% CrI 0.47-1.08]; warfarin vs dabigatran 0.88 [0.59-1.36]; factor Xa vs low-molecular-

21 compared with warfarin (0.25 [0.07-0.76]) or dabigatran (0.24 [0.07-0.77]).

22 bleeding, occurred in 15 patients receiving dabigatran (1.2%) and in 22 receiving warfarin (1.7%; ha

23 for dabigatran 150 mg (0.43, 0.26-0.72) and dabigatran 110 mg (0.36, 0.22-0.61) were also observed.

24 with dabigatran 150 mg (1.78, 1.35-2.35) and dabigatran 110 mg (1.40, 1.04-1.90) and lower intracrani

25 2,025 (90%) and 231 (10%) CKD patients took dabigatran 110 mg and 150 mg twice daily, respectively.

26 In patients with AF, dabigatran 110 mg bid and 150 mg bid are associated with

27 ought to compare the net clinical benefit of dabigatran 110 mg bid and 150 mg bid with that of warfar

28 ic event rates were similar for warfarin and dabigatran 110 mg regardless of the presence of VHD (HR,

29 For patients receiving dabigatran 110 mg, major bleed rates were lower than for

30 Men and women who filled a prescription for dabigatran (110 and 150 mg bid) were compared with match

31 ose rivaroxaban (10 to 15 mg once daily) and dabigatran (110 mg twice daily), respectively.

32 Any bleeding occurred in 200 dabigatran (15.6%) and 285 warfarin (22.1%; hazard ratio

33 We identified 17 eligible studies for dabigatran, 15 for rivaroxaban, and 4 for apixaban.

34 f major hemorrhage were 3.74% and 2.99%/y on dabigatran 150 and 110 mg (hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% confi

35 of Long-Term Anticoagulant Therapy) compared dabigatran 150 and 110 mg twice daily with warfarin in 1

36 Intracranial bleeds and death rates for dabigatran 150 and 110 mg were lower compared with warfa

37 wer intracranial bleeding risks than VKA for dabigatran 150 mg (0.43, 0.26-0.72) and dabigatran 110 m

38 higher gastrointestinal bleeding risks with dabigatran 150 mg (1.78, 1.35-2.35) and dabigatran 110 m

39 jor bleeding than with VKA was observed with dabigatran 150 mg (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence inte

40 stroke or systemic embolism were lower with dabigatran 150 mg and similar with 110 mg twice daily co

41 ses: -0.16 (95% CI: -0.80 to 0.43) comparing dabigatran 150 mg bid with 110 bid.

42 onated heparin for 5 to 11 days, we compared dabigatran 150 mg twice daily with warfarin.

43 ere most pronounced in patients treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily, whereas the association o

44 0.99 without VHD), and major bleed rates for dabigatran 150 mg were similar to those for warfarin in

45 For dabigatran 150 mg, stroke/systemic embolic event rates w

46 In the dabigatran 150-mg twice daily subgroup, the magnitude of

47 Dabigatran (150 mg twice daily) has been associated with

48 oing PVI were included; 376 patients were on dabigatran (150 mg), and 623 patients were on warfarin w

49 Dabigatran-150 mg had a significantly greater hazard of

50 In pooled analyses, dabigatran-150 mg was not superior to warfarin in preven

51 d across the 3 drugs (rivaroxaban: 20 mg QD, dabigatran: 150 mg BID, or warfarin) using 3-way propens

52 Dabigatran (20 and 200 nM) inhibits (50 and 93%) clot-bo

53 nitiating vitamin K antagonists (VKA) (42%), dabigatran (29%), rivaroxaban (13%), or apixaban (16%) w

54 age, 74.7 years [SD, 10.8]; men, 55.8%; NOAC dabigatran, 45347 patients; rivaroxaban, 54006 patients;

55 olic events occurred in 4 subjects receiving dabigatran (50%) and in 1 receiving phenprocoumon (13%;

56 Most patients treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily appeared not to have severe

57 In the subgroup treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily, there was no difference in

58 -PA within 4.5 hours, 251 were taking NOACs (dabigatran 87, rivaroxaban 129, and apixaban 35) before

59 OACs (rivaroxaban 7,572, apixaban 1,066, and dabigatran 96).

60 In contrast, treatment with dabigatran, a direct thrombin inhibitor, limited HFD-ind

61 For dabigatran, a normal thrombin time excludes clinically r

62 t lacking both coagulases (Deltacoa/vwb) and dabigatran, a pharmacological inhibitor of both staphylo

63 Dabigatran adherence (intensity of drug use during thera

64 After multivariable adjustment, dabigatran adherence across sites varied by a median odd

65 ciation between pharmacist-led education and dabigatran adherence was not statistically significant (

66 ixaban, edoxaban (antifactor Xa agents), and dabigatran (an antithrombin agent) were noninferior and

67 July 1, 2010 and March 31, 2012 with use of dabigatran and at least one gastrointestinal bleeding ep

68 eed for longer-term follow-up of patients on dabigatran and for further data comparing the 2 dabigatr

69 The possible relationship between dabigatran and myocardial infarction warrants further in

70 Patients treated with dabigatran and planned for an invasive procedure were el

71 matoma formation in mice anticoagulated with dabigatran and reduces mortality.

72 Dabigatran and rivaroxaban are new oral anticoagulants t

73 Dabigatran and rivaroxaban new users were matched to VKA

74 o describe the point prevalence (monthly) of dabigatran and rivaroxaban use among 29977 hemodialysis

75 Since then, dabigatran and rivaroxaban use in the atrial fibrillatio

76 More dialysis patients are being started on dabigatran and rivaroxaban, even when their use is contr

77 NOACs, particularly dabigatran and rivaroxaban, may be associated with lower

78 terval, 0.72-1.69) risk was observed between dabigatran and VKA new users.

79 ence in GI incidence rate between periods of dabigatran and warfarin (IRR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.75-1.31).

80 Dabigatran and warfarin have been compared for the treat

81 effectiveness of LAA occlusion compared with dabigatran and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atr

82 Dabigatran and warfarin were taken by 7,702 and 7,885 NV

83 n patients taking rivaroxaban, compared with dabigatran and warfarin, seems to be limited to men, whe

84 ction between treatment (warfarin versus all dabigatran) and carrier status was statistically signifi

85 population was composed of 19 713 VKA, 8443 dabigatran, and 4651 rivaroxaban new users.

86 ts; 4 anticoagulants (warfarin, rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and enoxaparin) and 5 diabetes agents (insul

87 All dabigatran- and rivaroxaban-treated patients were matche

88 el oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban) have been approved by internationa

89 treated with one of the NOACs (rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban) or VKA were identified between Feb

90 meta-analysis of randomized trials of DOACs (dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and edoxaban) for eff

91 Our protocol for perioperative management of dabigatran appears to be effective and feasible.

92 Rivaroxaban and dabigatran are already licensed for VTE treatment in the

93 st oral anticoagulant agents rivaroxaban and dabigatran are superior to warfarin for efficacy and saf

94 actors associated with improved adherence to dabigatran are unknown.

95 ess and safety study of standard-dose NOACs (dabigatran at 150 mg twice daily, rivaroxaban at 20 mg o

96 ctiveness and safety of standard-dose NOACs (dabigatran at 150 mg twice daily, rivaroxaban at 20 mg o

97 o catalytic inactive thrombin incubated with dabigatran at 20-fold higher therapeutic concentration r

98 double-blind, randomized trials, we compared dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg twice daily with warfarin

99 Here, we report that dabigatran at clinically relevant concentrations is an e

100 The timing of the last dose of dabigatran before the procedure was based on the creatin

101 d to identify patients receiving warfarin or dabigatran between October 28, 2010, and June 30, 2012.

102 e the structural similarities in the mode of dabigatran binding, the antidote does not bind known thr

103 temic embolism and major bleeding rates with dabigatran (both doses) compared with warfarin.

104 is was lower for treatment with apixaban and dabigatran compared with warfarin.

105 Men benefit from lower bleeding rates with dabigatran compared with warfarin.

106 direct oral anticoagulants (rivaroxaban and dabigatran), compared to each other and to warfarin amon

107 hemic events was inversely related to trough dabigatran concentrations (p = 0.045), with age and prev

108 s starting warfarin therapy, those receiving dabigatran did not have significantly different rates of

109 nt, target-specific oral anticoagulants like dabigatran do not.

110 r, with the CKD-EPI and MDRD equations, both dabigatran dosages displayed significantly lower rates o

111 The selection of the initial dabigatran dose (150, 220, or 300 mg twice daily) was ba

112 benefit-risk might be improved by tailoring dabigatran dose after considering selected patient chara

113 omen filled more prescriptions for the lower dabigatran dose compared with men (adjusted OR, 1.35; 95

114 tive reduction in major bleeding with either dabigatran dose compared with warfarin was greater in pa

115 tients continued to receive the double-blind dabigatran dose received in RE-LY, for up to 28 months o

116 Dabigatran dose was 110 and 75 mg BID in patients with n

117 ess intracranial bleeding was seen with both dabigatran doses (110 mg b.i.d., aHR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08

118 The incidence of MI was lower with both dabigatran doses (110 mg b.i.d., aHR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.18

119 mortality was significantly lower with both dabigatran doses (110 mg b.i.d., propensity-match group

120 igatran and for further data comparing the 2 dabigatran doses.

121 reatment using DOACs (rivaroxaban, apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban).

122 gonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban are administered i

123 at have reached the market, ximelagatran and dabigatran etexilat, are double prodrugs with low bioava

124 Dabigatran etexilate (DE) dose-dependently prolonged dil

125 during long-term treatment with warfarin or dabigatran etexilate (DE) in patients enrolled in the RE

126 Choosing between dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID and dabigatran etexilate

127 gatran etexilate 150 mg BID was superior and dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID was noninferior to warfa

128 ran were determined in patients treated with dabigatran etexilate 110 mg twice daily (bid) or 150 mg

129 between dabigatran etexilate 110 mg BID and dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID requires a careful asses

130 oagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial showed that dabigatran etexilate 150 mg BID was superior and dabigat

131 he ED80 value) compared to rivaroxaban 2 and dabigatran etexilate 1a.

132 All participants received oral dabigatran etexilate 220 mg twice daily for 3 days and a

133 d concentrations of the active metabolite of dabigatran etexilate and influence the safety and effica

134 ) was administered about 2 h after the final dabigatran etexilate dose.

135 fect curve from 2 h to 12 h (AUEC2-12) after dabigatran etexilate ingestion on days 3 and 4.

136 Dabigatran etexilate is a direct thrombin inhibitor and

137 Fixed-dose unmonitored treatment with dabigatran etexilate is effective and has a favorable sa

138 Six studies (1 administering dabigatran etexilate mesylate, 2 administering rivaroxab

139 In particular, the potential dual benefit of dabigatran etexilate might be reconsidered for patients

140 r abciximab) or anticoagulants (antithrombin dabigatran etexilate or anti-vitamin K acenocoumarol) wa

141 o (infusion site haematoma), and four during dabigatran etexilate pretreatment (three haematuria and

142 Dabigatran etexilate protected 75% of rats against IE du

143 The coagulopathy was prevented by dabigatran etexilate treatment.

144 The efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate were demonstrated in the RE-LY (Ran

145 We included the phase 3 trials that compared dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban

146 rticipants who received at least one dose of dabigatran etexilate.

147 cluding heparin, direct thrombin inhibitors [dabigatran etexilate], and heparins) causing decreasing

148 4) showed major bleeding risk increased with dabigatran exposure (p < 0.0001), age (p < 0.0001), ASA

149 was significantly lower in patients who held dabigatran for 1 or 2 doses than those on warfarin.

150 ran for 31,574 patients, data on apixaban vs dabigatran for 13,084 patients, and data on apixaban vs

151 We compared data on rivaroxaban vs dabigatran for 31,574 patients, data on apixaban vs dabi

152 lic or hemorrhagic complications with use of dabigatran for periprocedural anticoagulation in patient

153 Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the dabigatran group (0.3%) and 0 patients in the placebo gr

154 vant bleeding occurred in 36 patients in the dabigatran group (5.3%) and 12 patients in the placebo g

155 ificantly higher annual risk of AKI than the dabigatran group for those with a high CHA2DS2-VASc scor

156 1 to 6+ points, the incidence of AKI for the dabigatran group was relatively stable (1.87% to 2.91% p

157 Dabigatran has similar effects on VTE recurrence and a l

158 requently in patients given rivaroxaban than dabigatran (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% confidence inte

159 lly relevant bleeding was less frequent with dabigatran (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.71).

160 confidence interval, 1.03-1.42; P=0.021) and dabigatran (hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval,

161 ciated with a lower risk of GI bleeding than dabigatran (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.27-0.58; P < .001) or ri

162 on with GI bleeding in the very elderly than dabigatran (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29-0.71) or rivaroxaban

163 ard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.72) and dabigatran (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30-0.77) compared with w

164 for the reversal of anticoagulant effects of dabigatran in a two-part phase 1 study (rising-dose asse

165 andomized to receive either phenprocoumon or dabigatran in addition to aspirin for long-term anticoag

166 The perioperative management of dabigatran in clinical practice is heterogeneous.

167 ensitive detection of the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran in human plasma and whole blood samples, high

168 alysis, we assess the efficacy and safety of dabigatran in patients who did and did not receive conco

169 city to reverse the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran in patients who had serious bleeding (group A

170 able to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran in patients who had uncontrolled bleeding (gr

171 The use of dabigatran in patients with mechanical heart valves was

172 We evaluated the use of dabigatran in patients with mechanical heart valves.

173 darucizumab, an antibody fragment binding to dabigatran, in a mouse model of OAC-ICH.

174 ucizumab immediately and completely reversed dabigatran-induced anticoagulation in a dose-dependent m

175 mediate, complete, and sustained reversal of dabigatran-induced anticoagulation in healthy men, and w

176 cently the novel oral anticoagulants such as dabigatran (initial dose of 110 mg within 1-4 h after su

177 Dabigatran is a direct thrombin inhibitor that effective

178 Dabigatran is an oral direct thrombin inhibitor that has

179 However, dabigatran is associated with a lower risk for intracran

180 Whether dabigatran is associated with a lower risk of acute kidn

181 Among Asians with NVAF, dabigatran is associated with a lower risk of AKI than w

182 In real-world clinical practice, dabigatran is comparable with warfarin in preventing isc

183 Dabigatran is superior to warfarin in preventing stroke

184 Dabigatran is the first oral anticoagulant licensed for

185 Thromboembolic events on dabigatran led to early termination of a randomized cont

186 Dabigatran levels were dependent on renal function, age,

187 L, LAA closure was dominated by warfarin and dabigatran, meaning that it was less effective (8.44, 8.

188 was associated with lower exposure to active dabigatran metabolite.

189 nts were observed with apixaban (n = 12) and dabigatran (n = 11).

190 ts with NVAF taking rivaroxaban (n = 3,916), dabigatran (n = 5,921), or warfarin (n = 5,251) using da

191 ) related to direct anticoagulants including dabigatran (OAC-ICH).

192 e risk factors, with only the trials testing dabigatran or apixaban including few patients with 1 str

193 onvalvular atrial fibrillation who initiated dabigatran or rivaroxaban between July and November 2012

194 wanted to determine whether prescription of dabigatran or rivaroxaban was occurring in the dialysis

195 2 and discharged on warfarin or NOAC (either dabigatran or rivaroxaban).

196 amin K antagonist (VKA) oral anticoagulants, dabigatran or rivaroxaban, were compared with VKA in ant

197 patients enrolled in Medicare who initiated dabigatran or warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atri

198 mination of the causes of death according to dabigatran or warfarin showed that dabigatran significan

199 Adults with atrial fibrillation initiating dabigatran or warfarin therapy between November 2010 and

200 le, 64%; CHADS2 score, 2.1 +/- 1) to receive dabigatran or warfarin.

201 ly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either dabigatran or warfarin.

202 ore-matched patients starting treatment with dabigatran or warfarin.

203 nts (TSOACs) that directly inhibit thrombin (dabigatran) or factor Xa (rivaroxaban, apixaban) are eff

204 inhibitors that directly target factor IIa (dabigatran) or Xa (rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban) are

205 h AF were identified who initiated apixaban, dabigatran, or rivaroxaban between October 1, 2010, and

206 o statistically significant relationships in dabigatran- or rivaroxaban-treated patients without a re

207 alization for gastrointestinal bleeding than dabigatran (p = 0.0416), but on-treatment analysis showe

208 nths of treatment occurred in 30 of the 1279 dabigatran patients (2.3%) compared with 28 of the 1289

209 ent termination was significantly shorter in dabigatran patients (8.5 versus 12.0 months; P=0.015).

210 l of this study was to analyze the impact of dabigatran plasma concentrations, patient demographics,

211 e and bleeding outcomes were correlated with dabigatran plasma concentrations.

212 The first record of dabigatran prescription among hemodialysis patients occu

213 ation sites with 20 or more patients filling dabigatran prescriptions between 2010 and 2012 for nonva

214 In covariate adjusted Poisson regression, dabigatran (rate ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1

215 sk of hemorrhagic death was even larger with dabigatran (rate ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1

216 Concentrations of unbound dabigatran remained below 20 ng per milliliter at 24 hou

217 rate of thrombin, the high concentration of dabigatran required to achieve this effect the in vivo p

218 re fed chow containing either rivaroxaban or dabigatran, respectively.

219 gastrointestinal bleeding was similar during dabigatran risk period and non-exposed period (incidence

220 xcept intracranial hemorrhage, in which case dabigatran risk was reduced.

221 ported a relationship between drug levels of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban and coagulation as

222 Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban exhibit variable e

223 measurement of the anticoagulant activity of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban.

224 mpare 4 oral anticoagulant agents (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin) for their effects

225 New oral anticoagulants (such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) offer re

226 introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban), many h

227 w oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which include dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, are poi

228 direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, provide

229 bolism, compared a novel oral anticoagulant (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban) with war

230 odds ratios associated with initiating VKA, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban for patients aged >

231 who received at least 1 NOAC prescription of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban from January 1, 201

232 trial fibrillation with incident exposure to dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban from October 1, 201

233 nd arterial embolism in patients who started dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or warfarin.

234 Among dabigatran-, rivaroxaban-, and their VKA-matched-treated

235 in prescription of OAC overall, direct OAC (dabigatran/rivaroxaban/apixaban), and multivariable asso

236 Compared with warfarin, both rivaroxaban and dabigatran significantly decreased the risk for ischemic

237 ording to dabigatran or warfarin showed that dabigatran significantly reduced vascular (embolism and

238 n gap, the persistence rates were higher for dabigatran than for warfarin at both 6 months (72% versu

239 02), with carriers having less bleeding with dabigatran than warfarin (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confid

240 tions, the antidote achieves an affinity for dabigatran that is ~350 times stronger than its affinity

241 nt idarucizumab for reversing the effects of dabigatran, the investigational factor Xa decoy andexane

242 Among 25 289 patients starting dabigatran therapy and 25 289 propensity score-matched p

243 ar atrial fibrillation patients treated with dabigatran, there was variability in patient medication

244 hose taking either low-dose or standard-dose dabigatran, those with a warfarin-naive or warfarin-expe

245 opulation, warfarin was prescribed to 88.9%, dabigatran to 9.6%, and rivaroxaban to 1.5%.

246 The study focuses the dose administration of dabigatran to avoid the deaths due to hemorrhagic compli

247 edicinal Product Statistics, we identified a dabigatran-treated group and a 1:2 propensity-matched wa

248 of an excess of bleeding events or MI among dabigatran-treated patients in this propensity-matched c

249 Patients who initiated dabigatran treatment were more persistent than patients

250 confidence interval, 0.48-0.99; P=0.048) and dabigatran use (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence inter

251 and significance of the association between dabigatran use and myocardial infarction varied in sensi

252 ble analyses adjusted for propensity scores, dabigatran use was associated with a lower risk of bleed

253 Subgroup analysis revealed that among dabigatran users, those taking either low-dose or standa

254 compared with non-exposed period among naive dabigatran users.

255 te the safety of perioperative management of dabigatran using a specified protocol.

256 d directly with warfarin and indirectly with dabigatran, using data from the long-term (mean 3.8 year

257 mination of a randomized controlled trial of dabigatran versus phenprocoumon in left ventricular assi

258 in initiation of rivaroxaban or apixaban or dabigatran versus vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patient

259 The comparative safety of dabigatran versus warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular

260 nd mortality associated with rivaroxaban and dabigatran versus warfarin in Asians with NVAF.

261 myocardial infarction in patients receiving dabigatran versus warfarin in practice.

262 ients with atrial fibrillation randomised to dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial.

263 Trial data for the benefits and risks of dabigatran versus warfarin in the treatment of nonvalvul

264 , the incidences of stroke and bleeding with dabigatran versus warfarin were consistent with those se

265 AKI in Asians with NVAF who were prescribed dabigatran versus warfarin.

266 detect an increased risk of GI bleeding over dabigatran vs warfarin risk period.

267 ban was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.56-2.73), the OR for dabigatran was 1.58 (95% CI, 1.29-1.93), the OR for edox

268 The median maximum percentage reversal of dabigatran was 100% (95% confidence interval, 100 to 100

269 he median proportion of patients adherent to dabigatran was 74% (interquartile range [IQR], 66%-80%).

270 In particular, dabigatran was associated with a higher risk of gastroin

271 Dabigatran was associated with a lower risk of AKI than

272 Dabigatran was associated with a trend toward lower risk

273 When comparing each NOAC with warfarin, dabigatran was associated with lower risks of >/=30% dec

274 In general practice settings, dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of ischemic

275 The last dose of dabigatran was at 24, 48, or 96 hours before surgery acc

276 The efficacy of both dosages of dabigatran was consistent with the overall trial irrespe

277 [corrected] Dabigatran was held 1 to 2 doses before PVI and restarte

278 database of young and healthy participants, dabigatran was not associated with increased incidence r

279 lower stroke rates in women taking high-dose dabigatran was observed.

280 Resumption of dabigatran was prespecified according to the complexity

281 lysis, dose adjustment or discontinuation of dabigatran was required in 52 of 162 patients (32%).

282 Dabigatran was the most common non-VKA OAC (NOAC) (40% u

283 ectiveness ratios compared with warfarin and dabigatran were $20 486 and $23 422 per quality-adjusted

284 among Asians with NVAF, both rivaroxaban and dabigatran were associated with reduced risk for ischemi

285 analysis of RE-LY, plasma concentrations of dabigatran were determined in patients treated with dabi

286 coagulation (rivaroxaban and apixaban) than dabigatran which is a direct thrombin inhibitor.

287 Dabigatran, which is administered in a fixed dose and do

288 We report a case of a patient receiving dabigatran who developed a life-threatening bleeding com

289 Patients on dabigatran with a low-to-moderate risk of stroke (CHADS2

290 to compare a weighted benefit of 2 doses of dabigatran with each other, and with that of warfarin.

291 atio of the acoustic assay demonstrates that dabigatran with FEIBA 50 combination could be a safe rem

292 is a monoclonal antibody fragment that binds dabigatran with high affinity in a 1:1 molar ratio.

293 ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing dabigatran with warfarin (reference) were as follows: is

294 any VHD did not influence the comparison of dabigatran with warfarin.

295 ongitudinal, observational studies comparing dabigatran with warfarin.

296 ong-Term Anticoagulant Therapy (RELY) trial, dabigatran, with approximately 80% renal elimination, di

297 tage reversal of the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran within 4 hours after the administration of id

298 tage reversal of the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran within 4 hours after the administration of id

299 pletely reversed the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran within minutes.

300 en are more frequently treated with low-dose dabigatran, yet a trend toward lower stroke rates in wom