Warfarin v new anti coagulant drugs
Posted , 7 users are following.
Following episodes of PAF I was put on to Flecainide and Aspirin three years ago. I have only had one further episode in the three years and appear to be well controlled. I was recently called into my GP surgery and told that now I am over 65 I need to come off Aspirin and go on either Warfarin or one of the new anti coagulant drugs.
I was originally told by a Cardiologist that I was at low risk of having a stroke and wouldn't need Warfarin. Can anyone tell me their experiences of these new anti coagulants that don't need any monitoring but that also have no antidote in cases of severe bleeding? I have been advised to go on to one of these new drugs but admit I have serious misgivings .
2 likes, 8 replies
malcolm96513
Posted
Soobee
Posted
the newest and I would try that one. It has a much shorter half life than warfarin so although there is no
antidote you are less likely to bleed out. I wish I'd only had one episode of AF in 3yrs! Mine are every few months and I hate them.
Tarun
Posted
Tarun (hospital pharmacist)
Soobee
Posted
What amazes me is the drug companies released these drugs and got NICE and the FDA to approve them without any sort of antidote being available!
Personally I quite like being monitored regularly for INR. Tho I hate warfarin (it's given me rosacea) I'd rather take it than have a stroke.
derek76
Posted
http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d3653
Soobee
Posted
peter52762
Posted
Croley
Posted