Effect of edoxaban compared with other oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Current observational studies have compared the effectiveness and safety of edoxaban with other oral anticoagulants in patients with AF, but the results are still disputed. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effect of edoxaban in patients with AF. METHODS: We performed systematic research from the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until November 2022 to obtain relevant observational studies. Adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) of the outcomes were collected and pooled by a random-effects model. This study was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022314222). RESULTS: A total of 17 observational studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, edoxaban was associated with lower risks of stroke or systemic embolism (RR = 0.67, 95 % CI:0.61–0.74), major bleeding (RR = 0.54, 95 % CI:0.44–0.67), and intracranial hemorrhage (RR = 0.51, 95 % CI:0.29–0.90). Compared with dabigatran or rivaroxaban, edoxaban was associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism (dabigatran [RR = 0.76, 95 % CI:0.66–0.87]; rivaroxaban [RR = 0.81, 95 % CI:0.70–0.94]) and major bleeding (dabigatran [RR = 0.82, 95 % CI:0.69–0.98]; rivaroxaban [RR = 0.81, 95 % CI:0.70–0.94]). Compared with apixaban, edoxaban was associated with a reduced risk of stroke or systemic embolism (RR = 0.87, 95 % CI:0.79–0.97), but had similar risks of bleeding events. CONCLUSIONS: Our current evidence suggested that edoxaban might have superior effectiveness and/or safety outcomes than vitamin K antagonists, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban for stroke prevention in patients with AF.