Abstract
The objective of the study is mentioned, but it could be further clarified by explicitly stating the aim to compare the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) specifically in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We conducted a thorough electronic search of the literature, encompassing databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from their inception up to March 5, 2024. Furthermore, we meticulously examined the bibliographies of included studies to identify additional relevant literature. The reporting of this meta-analysis adhered to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. The endpoints evaluated in this meta-analysis included all-cause mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, and major bleeding. Data analysis was carried out utilizing RevMan Version 5.4 (Cochrane, London, United Kingdom). Dichotomous outcomes, including all-cause mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, and major bleeding, were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 11 studies were incorporated in this meta-analysis, comprising a pooled sample size of 44,863 participants with AF. The pooled analysis revealed no significant disparity between DOACs and VKAs concerning stroke or systemic embolism (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.14) and all-cause mortality (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.00). However, there was a noteworthy reduction in the risk of major bleeding events associated with DOACs compared to VKAs (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.96). Consequently, DOACs may be considered a viable alternative to warfarin in patients with ESRD. However, we need further larger clinical trials to validate these findings.