PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 15, 2019ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)147 citationsOpen Access

Benefits and Harms of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Chronic Kidney Disease

JHJeffrey T. HaBNBrendon L. NeuenLCLap P. Cheng

Structured PICO

Do NOACs reduce thromboembolic events and bleeding compared to VKAs in adults with CKD stages 3 to 5?

P
Population
34,082 adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3 to 5, including dialysis-dependent end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), requiring anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, thromboprophylaxis, or other cardiovascular disease (pooled from 45 RCTs).
I
Intervention
Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs)
C
Comparator
Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs)
O
Outcome
Stroke or systemic embolism, recurrent VTE or VTE-related death, and major bleedinghard clinical

In early-stage CKD, NOACs offer a superior benefit-risk profile compared to VKAs, though evidence remains insufficient to establish benefits or harms in advanced CKD or ESKD.

Limitations

  • Scant evidence for advanced CKD or ESKD
  • Data mostly from subgroups of large trials

Abstract

Background: Effects of oral anticoagulation in chronic kidney disease (CKD) are uncertain. Purpose: To evaluate the benefits and harms of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in adults with CKD stages 3 to 5, including those with dialysis-dependent end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Data Sources: English-language searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases (inception to February 2019); review bibliographies; and ClinicalTrials.gov (25 February 2019). Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials evaluating VKAs or NOACs for any indication in patients with CKD that reported efficacy or bleeding outcomes. Data Extraction: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and rated certainty of evidence. Data Synthesis: Forty-five trials involving 34 082 participants who received anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) (11 trials), venous thromboembolism (VTE) (11 trials), thromboprophylaxis (6 trials), prevention of dialysis access thrombosis (8 trials), and cardiovascular disease other than AF (9 trials) were included. All but the 8 trials involving patients with ESKD excluded participants with creatinine clearance less than 20 mL/min or estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 15 mL/min/1.73 m2. In AF, compared with VKAs, NOACs reduced risks for stroke or systemic embolism (risk ratio RR, 0.79 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence) and hemorrhagic stroke (RR, 0.48 CI, 0.30 to 0.76; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared with VKAs, the effects of NOACs on recurrent VTE or VTE-related death were uncertain (RR, 0.72 CI, 0.44 to 1.17; low-certainty evidence). In all trials combined, NOACs seemingly reduced major bleeding risk compared with VKAs (RR, 0.75 CI, 0.56 to 1.01; low-certainty evidence). Limitation: Scant evidence for advanced CKD or ESKD; data mostly from subgroups of large trials. Conclusion: In early-stage CKD, NOACs had a benefit-risk profile superior to that of VKAs. For advanced CKD or ESKD, there was insufficient evidence to establish benefits or harms of VKAs or NOACs. Primary Funding Source: None. (PROSPERO: CRD42017079709).

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ha et al. (2019) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a213258570f73dd9ac3cf88https://doi.org/10.7326/m19-0087
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper