ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2013
Oral anticoagulants in the management of venous thromboembolism.
Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent advances of natural and bioengineered extracellular vesicles and their application in vascular regeneration.Regenerative biomaterials · 2022Review
- Recent Advances of Cell Membrane Coated Nanoparticles in Treating Cardiovascular Disorders.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- A novel vitamin K derived anticoagulant tolerant to genetic variations of vitamin K epoxide reductase.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2021Article
- Safety and efficacy of switching from low molecular weight heparin to dabigatran in patients undergoing elective total hip or knee replacement surgery.Thrombosis journal · 2015Article
- The role of novel anticoagulants in the management of venous thromboembolic disease.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2014Article
- Rivaroxaban as an oral anticoagulant for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite advances in diagnosis, prevention, and management, venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a common cause of morbidity and mortality. For decades, antithrombotic therapy for prevention and treatment of VTE was limited to parenteral agents related to heparin and oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Both classes of anticoagulants are effective, but have limitations, including considerable variability in dose-response, narrow therapeutic margins between the risks of thrombosis and bleeding, and the need to monitor anticoagulation intensity. Over the past decade, the introduction of new oral anticoagulants that specifically inhibit coagulation factors IIa (thrombin) or Xa has changed practice in a variety of clinical situations, including VTE prophylaxis and treatment. In this Review, we outline the use of the novel oral anticoagulants apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban in the prevention and treatment of VTE, and discuss practical considerations for choosing the appropriate drug for each patient. Although the introduction of novel anticoagulant drugs is promising, selecting the optimum strategy for an individual patient requires an understanding of the specific circumstances associated with thrombus formation and the pharmacological properties of each agent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.