Comparison of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and warfarin on clinical outcomes in atrial fibrillation patients with renal dysfunction.

AIMS: We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and warfarin in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients according to renal dysfunction.

METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 1319 patients who had been taken oral anticoagulants. They were classified into patients taking NOACs (n = 326) and warfarin (n = 993). Renal dysfunction was defined as the estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min by using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation. The composite clinical outcomes were defined as the composite of death, hospitalization, and new-onset strokes. Safety outcomes were composed of major and minor bleeding. Subgroup analyses for clinical and safety outcomes were performed according to renal dysfunction during median 596 (506-612) follow-up days. The prevalence of renal dysfunction was similar between the two groups. The incidences of death, hospitalization, and strokes were not different between the two groups. However, the incidences of major bleeding was significantly higher in patients taking warfarin. In the subgroup analysis with renal dysfunction, the use of NOACs significantly improved the composite clinical outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio, HR, 0.30, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.11-0.77, interaction P = 0.018) and major bleeding (adjusted HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.45, interaction P = 0.199) even after the covariate adjustment. However, in patients without renal dysfunction, there were no differences in the incidences of the composite clinical outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of NOACs was more prominent in AF patients with renal dysfunction than without renal dysfunction. These results suggest that NOACs as the first choice oral anticoagulant in AF patients with renal dysfunction.