ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2010
Antithrombotic therapy in acute coronary syndromes: guidelines translated for the clinician.
Review in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre PCI hospital antithrombotic therapy for ST elevation myocardial infarction: striving for consensus.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2012Review
- Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and pharmacogenetic profile of the oral antiplatelet agent ticagrelor.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2012Review
- Cost effectiveness of anticoagulation in acute coronary syndromes.PharmacoEconomics · 2012Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy during the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) has been associated with improvements in short- and long-term clinical outcomes, regardless of whether patients are managed conservatively or with acute coronary revascularization. Translating the existing evidence for selection of the most appropriate antithrombotic strategy has been summarized in available guideline recommendations. Given the breadth of antithrombotic recommendations across existing U.S. and European guidelines, synthesis of these recommendations for practicing clinicians who treat patients with ACS are increasingly desired. Providing a summary of the similarities across guidelines while noting the areas where divergence exists becomes an important facet in translating optimal antithrombotic management in ACS for the treating clinician. This review highlights the important aspects of clinical practice guidelines that practicing physicians should consider when selecting antithrombotic therapies to reduce ischemic risk while minimizing hemorrhagic risk across all ACS subtypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20091089What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.