Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

source extracted confidence: high 2026-04-09
#humans #warfarin #atrial-fibrillation #anticoagulants #stroke

Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Shi et al., 2024 | Neuroepidemiology | Meta Analysis

Citation

Shi Minglei, Liu Lu, ... Wang Yanzhong. Effectiveness and Safety of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Neuroepidemiology. 2024;58(1):1-14. doi:10.1159/000534596

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence regarding the clinical outcomes of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and previous stroke is inconclusive, especially in patients with previous intracranial haemorrhage (ICrH). We aim to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness and safety of NOACs versus warfarin in AF patients with a history of stroke. METHODS: We searched studies published up to December 10, 2022, on PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies on adults with AF and previous ischaemic stroke (IS) or IrCH receiving either NOACs or warfarin and capturing outcome events (thromboembolic events, ICrH, and all-cause mortality) were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (including 19,489 patients with previous IS) and fifteen observational studies (including 132,575 patients with previous IS and 13,068 patients with previous ICrH) were included. RCT data showed that compared with warfarin, NOACs were associated with a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-0.96), ICrH (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36-0.90), and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98). In analysing observational studies, similar results were retrieved. Moreover, patients with previous ICrH had a lower OR on thromboembolic events than those with IS (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46-0.95 vs. OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.93) in the comparison between NOACs and warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Observational data showed that in AF patients with previous stroke, NOACs showed better clinical performance compared to warfarin and the benefits of NOACs were more pronounced in patients with previous IrCH versus those with IS. RCT data also showed NOACs are superior to warfarin. However, current RCTs only included AF patients who survived an IS, and further large RCTs focused on patients with previous ICrH are warranted.

Key Findings

Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (including 19,489 patients with previous IS) and fifteen observational studies (including 132,575 patients with previous IS and 13,068 patients with previous ICrH) were included. RCT data showed that compared with warfarin, NOACs were associated with a significant reduction in thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-0.96), ICrH (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.36-0.90), and all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98). In

Outcomes Measured

  • Requires manual extraction

Population

Field Value
Population atrial fibrillation
Sample Size 19489
Age Range See abstract
Condition See abstract

MeSH Terms

  • Humans
  • Warfarin
  • Atrial Fibrillation
  • Anticoagulants
  • Stroke
  • Administration, Oral
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Thromboembolism

Evidence Classification

  • Level: Meta Analysis
  • Publication Types: Systematic Review, Journal Article, Meta-Analysis, Comparative Study
  • Vertical: vitamin-k

Provenance

Source extracted via PubMed E-utilities API on 2026-04-09