ReviewBMC cardiovascular disorders2019
Indirect comparison of novel Oral anticoagulants among Asians with non-Valvular atrial fibrillation in the real world setting: a network meta-analysis.
Review in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Safety and Efficacy of Double Antithrombotic Therapy With Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Pooled it
- Agent-specific bleeding signatures in non-hypertensive versus hypertensive patients exposed to oral anticoagulants: a real-world pharmacovigilance study.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Safety and effectiveness of Rivaroxaban, Dabigatran and Apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation for stroke prophylaxis.BMC neurology · 2025Observational
- Real-World Data on the Incidence of Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and Mortality Among Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients in Türkiye: New Oral Anticoagulants-TURKey Study.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2024Article
- Handling related publications reporting real-world evidence in network meta-analysis: a case study in multiple sclerosis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A nationwide, population-based study in Korea.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Left atrial appendage occlusion for ischemic stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: clinical expert opinion and consensus statement for the Asian-Pacific region.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2021Article
- Comparison of readmissions among hospitalized nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with oral anticoagulants in the United States.Journal of drug assessment · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe development of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) has changed the landscape of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) management. In this study, the effectiveness and the safety of several NOACs were evaluated in a real-world setting among Asian patients with NVAF.
methodsThe literature search was conducted crossing different databases including Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library from inception through March 1, 2019, for studies which included real-world perspectives comparing the individual NOACs with each other or with warfarin among Asians with NVAF. The primary outcomes were defined as stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) and major bleeding; ischemic stroke, all-cause death as well as intracranial bleeding were classified as the secondary outcomes.
resultsFrom sixteen real-world studies, a total of 312,827 Asian patients were included in this analysis. In comparison with warfarin, the utilization of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban significantly lowered the risk of major bleeding (apixaban: HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.35-0.63; dabigatran: HR 0.59, 95%CI 0.47-0.73; rivaroxaban: HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.52-0.83) and lessened the all-cause death rate (apixaban: HR 0.29, 95%CI 0.16-0.52; dabigatran: HR 0.40, 95%CI 0.27-0.60; rivaroxaban: HR 0.42, 95%CI 0.28-0.65). Apixaban (HR 0.59; 95%CI 0.40-0.85) reduced the possibility of ischemic stroke when compared against dabigatran. Rivaroxaban showed a higher chance of causing an ischemic stroke (HR 1.61; 95%CI 1.08-2.41) and major bleeding (HR 1.39; 95%CI 1.02-1.90) than Apixaban.
conclusionsApixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were more effective than warfarin on reducing the risks of stroke and haemorrhage; meanwhile, apixaban was likely to lower the risk of major bleeding comparing to rivaroxaban.
trial registrationPROSPERO registry number: CRD42018086914 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.