Evidence Hub

Direct oral anticoagulants or warfarin in patients with left ventricular thrombus after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a pilot trial and a prespecified meta-analysis of randomised trials

Y. Jenab, P. Sadeghipour, Reza Mohseni-Badalabadi, R. Kaviani, K. Hosseini, Yeganeh Pasebani, Hamid Khederlou, A. Rafati et al.

EuroIntervention, 2025

50 participants · 23 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The role of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in the treatment of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain.

AIMS

We aimed to compare the effect of rivaroxaban versus warfarin in patients with STEMI complicated by LVT.

METHODS

Adult patients with STEMI and two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography showing LVT were assigned to rivaroxaban (15 mg once daily) or warfarin (international normalised ratio goal of 2.0-2.5) in an open-label, randomised clinical trial (RCT). A prospective pooled analysis was planned comparing DOAC- versus warfarin-based anticoagulation for the same indication. The main outcome of the RCT was complete LVT resolution at 3 months, determined by a blinded imaging core laboratory. Complete LVT resolution and bleeding were investigated in the pooled analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients (median age: 55 years, 18% females) were enrolled from June 2020 to November 2022. Three-month complete LVT resolution occurred in 19/25 (76.0%) patients assigned to rivaroxaban and 13/24 (54.2%) assigned to warfarin (relative risk [RR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-2.15; p=0.12) with no thrombotic or major bleeding events. Pooled analysis showed numerically better complete LVT resolution with DOACs (rivaroxaban and apixaban; 93/115 [80.8%] vs 79/112 [70.5%], RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.98-1.32; p=0.08) and less major bleeding (2/116 [1.7%] and 9/112 [8.0%], risk difference -0.06, 95% CI: -0.12…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 50 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free