American Society of Hirudotherapy

Real-world evidence comparing oral anticoagulants for NVAF in Europe: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Research article published in Future cardiology (2025)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Systematic reviewClinical TrialsCichewicz et al. · Future cardiology, 2025

Abstract

AIM: Atrial fibrillation is the most commonly sustained cardiac arrhythmia, increasing the risk of stroke and systemic embolic events. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare real-world evidence (RWE) on the effectiveness and safety of edoxaban with other direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in Europe. MATERIALS & METHODS: Searches from January 2013 to December 2022 identified comparative observational studies assessing effectiveness/safety outcomes in patients with NVAF. Bayesian NMA estimated comparative effectiveness/safety of edoxaban with other DOACs and VKAs. RESULTS: The review identified 57 studies analyzing data from 24 unique databases; 33 studies were included in the base-case analyses. DOACs showed benefit over VKAs for most outcomes, of which major bleeding and all-cause mortality were most commonly reported. Edoxaban demonstrated a comparable effectiveness/safety profile to other DOACs and significantly reduced risk of major bleeding (hazard ratio [95% credible interval]: 0.67 [0.54, 0.84]) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.69 [0.51, 0.94]) versus rivaroxaban. CONCLUSION: This NMA provides valuable insights into the real-world effectiveness and safety of DOACs and VKAs in Europe, supporting clinical decision-making and adding to the existing evidence base from clinical trials. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common heart problem that can cause strokes and blood clots. This study looked at how well and how safely the blood thinner edoxaban works compared to other blood thinners and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in people with AF living in Europe. Researchers reviewed studies from 2013 to 2022 and included European studies that compared these blood thinners in people with AF. They used an analytical method to estimate statistical comparisons of effectiveness and safety between treatments. A total of 57 studies were identified and 33 were included in the analysis. The results showed that most newer blood thinners (direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs]) were better than VKAs for preventing serious bleeding events and death. Edoxaban was found to be as effective and safe as other newer blood thinners and had a lower risk of major bleeding and bleeding in the brain compared with rivaroxaban. This study gives useful information about the real-world use of these blood thinners in Europe, which helps doctors make better treatment choices for their patients.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsHumansAdministration, OralAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationEuropeFactor Xa InhibitorsStrokeThiazolesPyridines

Summary

Peer-reviewed clinical and outcomes research relevant to medicinal leech therapy and its biology. Indexed in PubMed and verified against the NCBI record.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis pooled 57 European real-world observational studies (33 in the base case, drawn from 24 databases) on anticoagulants for non-valvular atrial fibrillation, finding that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) generally outperformed vitamin K antagonists for outcomes such as major bleeding and all-cause mortality, and that edoxaban showed a comparable profile to other DOACs while significantly reducing major bleeding (HR 0.67 [0.54-0.84]) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.69 [0.51-0.94]) versus rivaroxaban. For hirudotherapy this maps the modern systemic-anticoagulant field against which the medicinal-leech secretome's antithrombotic components are conceptually positioned, underscoring that bleeding-risk reduction remains a central clinical goal. As an indirect comparison built on observational rather than randomized data, the network meta-analysis is subject to confounding and database heterogeneity, and it does not study leech therapy.

Citation

Real-world evidence comparing oral anticoagulants for NVAF in Europe: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Cichewicz et al. · Future cardiology, 2025

Added to ASH library: May 29, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.