Anticoagulation could not be currently stopped even after successful thoracoscopic ablation of
atrial fibrillation for at least 2 months. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy outcomes between a new oral
anticoagulant and
warfarin after thoracoscopic ablation. This trial was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled study comparing
edoxaban and
warfarin in patients undergoing thoracoscopic ablation of
atrial fibrillation. This study enrolled 60 patients randomly assigned into 2 groups. The primary endpoint was efficacy outcomes, including
stroke and systemic thromboembolic events. The secondary endpoint was safety outcomes including major
bleeding and
pericarditis. The patients were evaluated at discharge, 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. No
stroke and thromboembolic events were noted in both treatment groups during the follow-up period. During the 6 months follow-up period, 4 (13%) of 30 patients in the
edoxaban group experienced minor
bleeding events, whereas none were noted in the
warfarin group. Five anticoagulation-related events (
bleeding, and prolongation of international normalized ratio), including
pericarditis, were noted in both the
edoxaban and
warfarin groups. No statistically significant difference existed between the 2 groups. In conclusion, this study showed the comparable results of
edoxaban to
warfarin during the window period of post-thoracoscopic ablation of
atrial fibrillation. Moreover, anticoagulation-related events were rather affected by patient factors and not by the
anticoagulant type.