Skip to main content
. 2021 Oct 15;8:757188. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.757188

Table 2.

Pooled HRs of the effectiveness and safety outcomes between NOACs vs. warfarin in patients with AF.

SSE Major bleeding Ischemic stroke All-cause death Intracranial hemorrhage Gastrointestinal bleeding
DA vs. WAR
No. of effect estimates 9 13 11 5 13 12
Crude event rates 2.08 vs. 2.89% 2.65 vs. 4.14% 1.46 vs. 2.14% 4.34 vs. 8.55% 0.29 vs. 0.81% 1.26 vs. 1.57%
HRs and 95% CIs 0.82 (0.71–0.96) 0.76 (0.65–0.87) 0.93 (0.86–1.00) 0.75 (0.53–1.04) 0.46 (0.38–0.55) 0.97 (0.80–1.17)
P-value 0.01 0.0001 0.06 0.08 <0.00001 0.73
I2 statistic 82% 91% 25% 91% 66% 93%
RIV vs. WAR
No. of effect estimates 10 13 10 4 11 10
Crude event rates 1.37 vs. 2.29% 3.31 vs. 4.14% 1.36 vs. 2.18% 8.60 vs. 11.69% 0.47 vs. 0.89% 1.72 vs. 1.83%
HRs and 95% CIs 0.80 (0.75–0.85) 0.92 (0.84–1.00) 0.84 (0.79–0.90) 1.02 (0.77–1.36) 0.69 (0.63,0.76) 0.96 (0.82,1.12)
P-value <0.00001 0.06 <0.00001 0.88 <0.00001 0.62
I2 statistic 15% 83% 29% 94% 27% 89%
API vs. WAR
No. of effect estimates 10 11 10 4 11 9
Crude event rates 1.08 vs. 2.47% 2.12 vs. 4.35% 0.85 vs. 1.96% 3.24 vs. 10.41% 0.27 vs. 0.80% 0.78 vs. 1.73%
HRs and 95% CIs 0.75 (0.65–0.86) 0.61 (0.56–0.67) 0.73 (0.62–0.86) 0.77 (0.39–1.54) 0.62 (0.50–0.75) 0.63 (0.54–0.73)
P-value <0.0001 <0.00001 0.0002 0.46 <0.00001 <0.00001
I2 statistic 88% 73% 83% 97% 75% 84%
EDO vs. WAR
No. of effect estimates 2 3 3 - 2 3
Crude event rates 1.16 vs. 3.84% 0.88 vs. 2.80% 1.17 vs. 2.83% - 0.22 vs. 1.10% 0.62 vs. 1.66%
HRs and 95% CIs 0.71 (0.60–0.83) 0.58 (0.45–0.74) 0.67 (0.59–0.76) - 0.60 (0.25–1.44) 0.65 (0.41–1.04)
P-value <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.00001 - 0.25 0.07
I2 statistic 0% 68% 0% - 95% 90%

SSE, stroke or systemic embolism; DA, dabigatran; RIV, rivaroxaban; API, apixaban; EDO, edoxaban; WAR, warfarin; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.