I'm at a loss to understand why GPs and cardiologists have a preference for one or the other of the anticoagulants. Warfarin is more or less understandable based on history and familiarity and ease of tracking effectiveness. It's also understandable why many patients, including myself, don't want to take it.
For me it's mainly because I don't believe my lifestyle can accommodate the strict regime of diet and testing which Warfarin would require.
The others three remain more of a mystery. My GP favoured Apixaban but didn't fully explain why, then the cardiologist switched me to Rivaroxaban based on guidelines of the European Heart Rhythm Association.
Because I also have heart disease I was initially taken off Aspirin. Now the cardiologist wants me to take aspirin again. Reason being that the action of the aspirin and the rivaroxaban is different and I need both because of the heart disease.
There was also confusion with differing views about the interaction of any of the NOACS with Carbamazepine which I have to take. The cardiologist believes, based on the European guidelines, that the Rivaroxaban is the safest option. ie: Carbamazepine reduces the effectiveness of Rivaroxaban, but not as much as the it reduces the effectiveness of the other two.
NOW, my question is
What are you taking and do you know the reasoning behind it? Has your GP or cardiologist explained why you're on that particular product and not another? And if you have heart disease are you also on aspirin?