Table 6

Main differences between the included studies (n=39)

Study itemRange, total number of studies or description
CountryUSA: n=24
Denmark: n=5
Taiwan: n=4
China: n=1
France: n=1
Scotland: n=1
Sweden: n=1
Spain: n=1
UK: n=1
NOAC included in included studiesDabigatran: n=39
Rivaroxaban: n=39
Apixaban: n=26
Edoxaban: n=1
Most prescribed NOAC in included studies per countryDabigatran: Denmark
Rivaroxaban: USA, UK, China, Scotland and Taiwan
Apixaban: In none of the included studies
Edoxaban: In none of the included studies
About equal*: France, Spain, Sweden
Baseline characteristicsMean age, years: 65–84
% males: 39–73
Mean CHA2DS2-VASc: 2.1–4.9
Primary study outcomesEffectiveness outcomes:
  • Stroke

  • Systemic embolism or composite of stroke/systemic embolism

  • All-cause death

  • Myocardial infarction

  • Venous thromboembolism


Safety outcomes:
  • Major bleeding

  • A specific type of bleeding (eg, intracranial haemorrhage, gastrointestinal bleeding etc)

  • Liver injury

Statistical approachesPS matching: n=18
IPTW: n=8
PS stratification: n=1
Cox PH regression model: n=10
Unadjusted analyses: n=2
Sample sizen=698–265 583
Study resultsOf the 26 studies in which apixaban, rivaroxaban and dabigatran were included:
  • Apixaban was favourable compared with dabigatran and rivaroxaban: n=13

  • No single favourable NOAC: n=13

  • *About equal distribution between dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban. Edoxaban is not included in these studies.

  • CHA2DS2-Vasc, Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 years, Diabetes Mellitus, Prior Stroke or TIA or thromboembolism, Vascular disease, Age 65–74 years, Sex; NOACs, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants.