↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events among atrial fibrillation patients with chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
62 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
260 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events among atrial fibrillation patients with chronic kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011373.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miho Kimachi, Toshi A Furukawa, Kimihiko Kimachi, Yoshihito Goto, Shingo Fukuma, Shunichi Fukuhara

Abstract

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), which is more prevalent among CKD patients than the general population. AF causes stroke or systemic embolism, leading to increased mortality. The conventional antithrombotic prophylaxis agent warfarin is often prescribed for the prevention of stroke, but risk of bleeding necessitates regular therapeutic monitoring. Recently developed direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are expected to be useful as alternatives to warfarin. To assess the efficacy and safety of DOAC including apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin among AF patients with CKD. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register (up to 1 August 2017) through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Specialised Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which directly compared the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors or factor Xa inhibitors) with dose-adjusted warfarin for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events in non-valvular AF patients with CKD, defined as creatinine clearance (CrCl) or eGFR between 15 and 60 mL/min (CKD stage G3 and G4). Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association between anticoagulant therapy and all strokes and systemic embolic events as the primary efficacy outcome and major bleeding events as the primary safety outcome. Confidence in the evidence was assessing using GRADE. Our review included 12,545 AF participants with CKD from five studies. All participants were randomised to either DOAC (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban) or dose-adjusted warfarin. Four studies used a central, interactive, automated response system for allocation concealment while the other did not specify concealment methods. Four studies were blinded while the other was partially open-label. However, given that all studies involved blinded evaluation of outcome events, we considered the risk of bias to be low. We were unable to create funnel plots due to the small number of studies, thwarting assessment of publication bias. Study duration ranged from 1.8 to 2.8 years. The large majority of participants included in this study were CKD stage G3 (12,155), and a small number were stage G4 (390). Of 12,545 participants from five studies, a total of 321 cases (2.56%) of the primary efficacy outcome occurred per year. Further, of 12,521 participants from five studies, a total of 617 cases (4.93%) of the primary safety outcome occurred per year. DOAC appeared to probably reduce the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism events (5 studies, 12,545 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.00; moderate certainty evidence) and to slightly reduce the incidence of major bleeding events (5 studies, 12,521 participants: RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.04; low certainty evidence) in comparison with warfarin. Our findings indicate that DOAC are as likely as warfarin to prevent all strokes and systemic embolic events without increasing risk of major bleeding events among AF patients with kidney impairment. These findings should encourage physicians to prescribe DOAC in AF patients with CKD without fear of bleeding. The major limitation is that the results of this study chiefly reflect CKD stage G3. Application of the results to CKD stage G4 patients requires additional investigation. Furthermore, we could not assess CKD stage G5 patients. Future reviews should assess participants at more advanced CKD stages. Additionally, we could not conduct detailed analyses of subgroups and sensitivity analyses due to lack of data.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 260 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 17%
Student > Bachelor 39 15%
Other 27 10%
Researcher 27 10%
Student > Postgraduate 19 7%
Other 59 23%
Unknown 46 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 113 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 24 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 9%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Other 27 10%
Unknown 59 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2021.
All research outputs
#606,949
of 18,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,404
of 11,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,477
of 333,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#41
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 254 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.