Real-world comparison of direct-acting oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

<b>Background</b>: No clear clinical guidelines exist on anticoagulant use for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. We compared the efficacy and safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in patients with CKD by pooling data from real-world observational studies. <b>Research design &amp; methods</b>: This systematic review searched PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases and pooled multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of outcomes. <b>Results</b>: Fifteen studies were included. Our results indicated a small but significant reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality (p = 0.01), stroke or systemic embolism (p = 0.03), and major bleeding (p = 0.01) with DOAC as compared to VKA. In subgroup analysis based on the severity of CKD, no difference in the risk of stroke or systemic embolism was noted in any subgroups. The risk of mortality was reduced only in patients with moderate-severe or severe CKD and the risk of major bleeding was reduced only in patients with moderate-severe or moderate CKD. <b>Conclusion</b>: DOACs are associated with only a modest reduction in stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality when compared to VKA in CKD patients. Reduction in mortality and major bleeding with DOAC may only be seen in moderate-to-severe CKD patients.