Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants vs. vitamin-K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease: a nationwide cohort study.

Background: We aimed to compare effectiveness and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus vitamin-K antagonists (VKA) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving dialysis.

Methods: By using personal identification numbers, we cross-linked individual-level data from Danish administrative registries. We identified every citizen with a prior diagnosis of AF and CKD who initiated NOAC or VKA (2011-2017). An external analysis of 727 AF patients with CKD (no dialysis) was performed to demonstrate level of kidney function in a comparable population. Study outcomes included incidents of stroke/thromboembolisms (TEs), major bleedings, myocardial infarctions (MIs), and all-cause mortality. We used Cox proportional hazards models to determine associations between oral anticoagulant treatment and outcomes.

Results: Of 1560 patients included, 1008 (64.6%) initiated VKA and 552 (35.4%) initiated NOAC. In a comparable population we found that 95.3% of the patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 59 mL/min. Patients treated with NOAC had a significantly decreased risk of major bleeding (hazard ratio (HR): 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.26-0.84) compared to VKA. There was not found a significant association between type of anticoagulant and risk of stroke/TE (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.39-1.78), MI (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.18-1.11), or all-cause mortality (HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.77-1.26).

Conclusion: NOAC was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding in patients with AF and CKD compared to VKA. No difference was found in risk of stroke/TE, MI, and all-cause mortality.