ReviewThrombosis journal2014
Measurement of non-VKA oral anticoagulants versus classic ones: the appropriate use of hemostasis assays.
Review in Thrombosis journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Time in the Therapeutic Range for Assessing Anticoagulation Quality in Patients Receiving Continuous Unfractionated Heparin.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis · 2018Trial
- Comparison of analytical performances between clot waveform analysis and FibWave in edoxaban-treated patients and healthy controls.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Limitations of Specific Coagulation Tests for Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Critical Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Observational
- Rivaroxaban dose adjustment using thrombin generation in severe congenital protein C deficiency and warfarin-induced skin necrosis.Blood advances · 2018Article
- Laboratory measures of coagulation among trauma patients on NOAs: results of the AAST-MIT.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2018Article
- The Anticoagulated trauma patient in the age of the direct oral anticoagulants: a Canadian perspective.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2017Article
- Direct acting oral anticoagulant: Bench to bedside.Medical journal, Armed Forces India · 2017Review
- Point-of-care testing for emergency assessment of coagulation in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants.Critical care (London, England) · 2017Observational
- Direct oral anticoagulants and the bleeding patient.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2016Article
- Newer Oral Anticoagulants: Stroke Prevention and Pitfalls.The open cardiovascular medicine journal · 2016Article
- New oral anticoagulants: their advantages and disadvantages compared with vitamin K antagonists in the prevention and treatment of patients with thromboembolic events.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2015Review
- Non-VKA Oral Anticoagulants: Accurate Measurement of Plasma Drug Concentrations.BioMed research international · 2015Review
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional anticoagulant agents such as vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), unfractionated heparin (UFH), low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) and fondaparinux have been widely used in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases. However, these agents are associated with limitations, such as the need for regular coagulation monitoring (VKAs and UFH) or a parenteral route of administration (UFH, LMWHs and fondaparinux). Several non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are now widely used in the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases and in stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Unlike VKAs, NOACs exhibit predictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. They are therefore usually given at fixed doses without routine coagulation monitoring. However, in certain patient populations or special clinical circumstances, measurement of drug exposure may be useful, such as in suspected overdose, in patients experiencing a hemorrhagic or thromboembolic event during the treatment's period, in those with acute renal failure, in patients who require urgent surgery or in case of an invasive procedure. This article aims at providing guidance on laboratory testing of classic anticoagulants and NOACs.
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.