Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 May;118(5):906-913.
doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1637755. Epub 2018 Apr 3.

International Normalized Ratio Targets for Left-Sided Mechanical Valve Replacement

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

International Normalized Ratio Targets for Left-Sided Mechanical Valve Replacement

Saurabh Gupta et al. Thromb Haemost. 2018 May.

Abstract

Background: Guidelines recommend higher international normalized ratio (INR) targets for patients with mechanical valves believed to be at higher risk for thromboembolism. Higher INR targets are associated with increased bleeding risk. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing effects of lower and higher INR targets on thromboembolic and bleeding risk in patients with mechanical heart valves.

Methods: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating lower versus higher INR targets for adults with bileaflet mechanical valves. We performed title and abstract screening, full-text review, risk of bias evaluation and data collection independently and in duplicate. We pooled data using a random effects model and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to evaluate overall quality of evidence.

Results: We identified six RCTs (n = 5,497). Lower INR targets were associated with significantly less bleeding-22% versus 40% (relative risk [RR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31, 0.93, p = 0.03, very low quality). There was no difference in thromboembolism-2% in both groups (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.85, p = 0.20, very low quality) or mortality-5.5% with lower INR targets versus 8.5% (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.21, p = 0.47, moderate quality).

Conclusion: In patients with mechanical valves, higher INR targets are not supported by current evidence, which is of very low quality. In fact, our systematic review suggests that lower INR targets offer significantly lower bleeding risks with no significant difference in thromboembolic risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Comment in

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources