Oral anticoagulation versus antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) compared with antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention in adult patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Method We searched major databases (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Web of Science) for RCTs published until March 2021. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke, and the main safety outcomes were major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNB). We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We used a random-effects model to determine pooled risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals in the datasets and key subgroups. Findings Our search identified two RCTs, involving a total of 12,603 patients with ESUS. Anticoagulation with dabigatran or rivaroxaban compared with aspirin did not reduce the risk of recurrent stroke (RR, 0.96 [0.76-1.20]) or increase major bleeding (RR, 1.77 [0.80-3.89]) but significantly increased the composite of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR, 1.57 [1.26-1.97]). Prespecified subgroup analysis demonstrated consistent results according to age and sex. Additional post-hoc subgroup analyses demonstrated consistent results according to prior stroke and presence of a patent foramen ovale but suggested that DOACs reduced recurrent stroke in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 80 ml/min (interaction P = 0.0234). Discussion/conclusion Direct oral anticoagulations are not more effective than aspirin in preventing stroke recurrence in patients with ESUS and increase bleeding. Registration PROSPERO ID: CRD42019138593