American Society of Hirudotherapy

Renal outcomes following oral anticoagulation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A multicentre, propensity-matched retrospective analysis in an Asian population

Research article published in Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals (2025)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Observational studyClinical TrialsKoh et al. · Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals, 2025

Abstract

BackgroundDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been linked to better renal outcomes than warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We aimed to compare the renal function outcomes in Asian NVAF patients treated with warfarin and DOAC.MethodsThis multicentre retrospective study analysed NVAF patients newly initiated on oral anticoagulant (OAC) from 2013 to 2022 across seven tertiary hospitals. Using propensity-score matching, warfarin and DOAC recipients were matched by incorporating 22 variables potentially affecting renal outcomes. Primary endpoints include clinically significant (≥30%) estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline and worsened chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage.ResultsA total of 766 subjects (383 warfarin; 383 DOAC; mean age 70.7 ± 9.6 years) were analysed. Baseline eGFR was 75.0 (59.0-89.0) for warfarin and 76.0 (59.0-88.0) ml/min/1.73 m2 for DOAC groups. Following median OAC treatment of 2.8 ± 1.6 years, 14.5% experienced clinically significant eGFR decline and 31.9% had worsened CKD stage. DOAC was associated with a lower risk of clinically significant eGFR decline (OR 0.529, 95% CI 0.343-0.817, p = 0.004) and worsened CKD stage (OR 0.713, 95% CI 0.521-0.975, p = 0.034). In subgroup analysis, rivaroxaban (OR 0.337, 95% CI 0.157-0.724, p = 0.005) and dabigatran (OR 0.516, 95% CI 0.285-0.934, p = 0.029), but not apixaban (OR 0.759, 95% CI 0.432-1.333, p = 0.338), were associated with a lower risk of clinically significant eGFR decline.ConclusionsSignificant renal function decline is common during follow-up of Asian NVAF patients on OAC. Among the DOACs, rivaroxaban and dabigatran, but not apixaban, were associated with a lower risk of renal function decline than warfarin. These findings warrant confirmation in prospective randomised studies.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyComparative Study
Indexed MeSH termsHumansRetrospective StudiesAtrial FibrillationMaleFemaleAgedAdministration, OralAnticoagulantsGlomerular Filtration RateTreatment OutcomeWarfarinRenal Insufficiency, Chronic

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 multicentre, propensity-matched retrospective analysis of 766 Asian non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients (383 warfarin vs 383 DOAC) found that, over ~2.8 years, DOACs were associated with lower risk of clinically significant eGFR decline (OR 0.529) and CKD-stage worsening than warfarin, with rivaroxaban and dabigatran — but not apixaban — driving the renal benefit in subgroup analysis. The relevance to hirudotherapy is indirect: dabigatran is a direct thrombin inhibitor acting on the same target as the leech anticoagulant hirudin, so the study adds to the safety/outcomes picture of the thrombin-inhibition drug class that the medicinal-leech secretome inspired. Caveat: this is a retrospective, observational comparison of synthetic oral anticoagulants in a specific Asian population — not a study of leech therapy — and the authors themselves state the renal findings warrant confirmation in prospective randomized trials.

Citation

Renal outcomes following oral anticoagulation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A multicentre, propensity-matched retrospective analysis in an Asian population.

Koh et al. · Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals, 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.