Early Versus Delayed Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of early oral anticoagulation with delayed anticoagulant therapy in patients who have had a recent stroke and have atrial fibrillation (AF). This meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The literature search was independently performed by two authors. We searched PubMed and Scopus using search strings that included the following terms: "stroke," "atrial fibrillation," "oral anticoagulants," "recurrent stroke," and "intracerebral hemorrhage." Our search spanned from the inception of databases to May 25, 2023. The primary outcome assessed in this study was the composite efficacy outcome (as defined by individual studies). Recurrent ischemic stroke (IS), intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and death from any cause were assessed as secondary outcomes. For safety analysis, bleeding events were compared between the two study groups. We included five articles in this meta-analysis, comprising a total of 7958 patients (including 3793 in the early treatment group and 4165 in the delayed treatment group). Pooled analysis showed that the risk of composite efficacy outcome (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.51-0.93, p-value: 0.01) and recurrent ischemic stroke (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53-0.94, p-value: 0.02) were lower in the early treatment group. However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of all-cause mortality, intracranial hemorrhage, or bleeding events. In light of the findings, healthcare professionals should carefully evaluate the risks and benefits of early versus delayed DOAC treatment in individual patients, considering factors such as stroke severity, bleeding risk, and patient preferences.