Introduction: Catheter ablation (CA) of atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important rhythm control strategy for patients with drug-refractory AF. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) as uninterrupted anticoagulation in patients undergoing AF ablation to assess safety and efficacy of DOAC, after the publication of recent data on edoxaban in CA of AF. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of RCTs enrolling patients undergoing AF ablation. We assessed Mantel-Haenszel pooled estimates of risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for thromboembolic events, major bleeding (MB), and non-major bleeding (NMB). Results: A total of 2118 patients have been included in the analysis. Compared with patients receiving VKA, patients receiving DOACs had a lower, although non-significant, risk of thromboembolic events (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.09–1.76; P = 0.23). MB rates in patients treated with DOACs were statistically significantly lower than VKA (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39–0.93, P = 0.02). The incidence of NMB was not significantly different (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.83–1.57, p n.s.). Conclusions: In a meta-analysis of RCTs, an uninterrupted DOACs strategy for CA of AF appears to be superior to uninterrupted VKA in terms of safety; a non-significant trend favoring DOACs in terms of efficacy is also evident.