Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran Compared to Vitamin K Antagonists in Non-Asian Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

• Published in: Clinical drug investigation 2021-11, Vol.41 (11), p.941-953
• Main Authors: Escobar, Carlos, Barrios, Vivencio, Lip, Gregory Y. H., Amin, Alpesh N., Auladell-Rispau, Ariadna, Santero, Marilina, Salazar, Josefina, Requeijo, Carolina
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Anticoagulants - adverse effects; Atrial Fibrillation - drug therapy; Bias; Cardiac arrhythmia; Clinical medicine; Clinical trials; Confidence intervals; Dabigatran - adverse effects; Drug dosages; Embolisms; Heart attacks; Humans; Internal Medicine; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Meta-analysis; Mortality; Performance evaluation; Pharmacology/Toxicology; Pharmacotherapy; Rivaroxaban - therapeutic use; Scholarly publishing; Stroke; Stroke - drug therapy; Stroke - epidemiology; Stroke - prevention & control; Systematic Review; Vitamin K; Vocabularies & taxonomies
• ISSN: 1173-2563; 1179-1918
• DOI: 10.1007/s40261-021-01091-w

Background and Objective Real-life data about the use of dabigatran in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation are warranted. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, globally and stratified by dose (110/150 mg twice daily), vs vitamin K antagonists in non-Asian patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation from “real-world” studies. Methods A systematic review was performed according to Cochrane methodological standards. The results were reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Statement) statement. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess bias risk. MEDLINE and EMBASE, from inception up to May 2021, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and free search terms, were searched.  Results A total of 34 studies, corresponding to 37 articles involving 1,600,722 participants (1,154,283 exposed to vitamin K antagonists and 446,439 to dabigatran) were eligible for this review. Dabigatran 150 mg reduced the risk of ischemic stroke compared with vitamin K antagonists, with a 14% risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74–0.98). Globally, dabigatran reduced the risk of all-cause mortality compared with vitamin K antagonists (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69–0.84), with a greater effect observed with dabigatran 150 mg (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.58–0.73). There was a trend towards a lower risk of myocardial infarction with dabigatran 150 mg (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71–1.04). Regarding the primary safety outcomes, dabigatran (either at a dose of 150 mg or 110 mg) reduced the risk of major bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonists (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.70–0.83), as well as the risk of intracranial bleeding (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.39–0.50) and fatal bleeding (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60–0.95), but with a slight increase in gastrointestinal bleeding risk (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08–1.26). Conclusions Dabigatran has a favorable impact on effectiveness and safety outcomes compared with vitamin K antagonists in real-world populations.