SynthesisClinical cardiology2026
Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Cerebrovascular Ischemic Outcomes in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a major cause of thromboembolic events, including ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). While Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) have long been used for stroke prevention, Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as potential alternatives due to improved pharmacologic profiles and safety. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus VKAs in patients with non-valvular AF, with a focus on cerebrovascular ischemic outcomes.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library was performed in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies reporting cerebrovascular events, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality were included. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model.
resultsEleven studies encompassing 814 716 patients were included. DOAC use was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent cerebrovascular ischemic events compared with VKAs (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78-0.88, p < 0.0001). The risk of major bleeding was also reduced with DOACs (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.82, p < 0.0001). All-cause mortality was similar between groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.34-3.13), though sensitivity analysis excluding one heterogeneous study favored DOACs (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.98).
conclusionIn patients with non-valvular AF, DOACs demonstrate superior efficacy in reducing cerebrovascular ischemic outcomes and lower bleeding risk compared to VKAs, with comparable mortality outcomes. These findings support current guidelines recommending DOACs as first-line anticoagulation for stroke prevention in AF.
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.