ArticleBrain and behavior2015
Helsinki experience on nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants for treating cervical artery dissection.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin K antagonist versus novel oral anticoagulants for management of cervical artery dissection: Interactive systematic review and meta-analysis.European stroke journal · 2022Article
- Antiplatelets or anticoagulants? Secondary prevention in cervical artery dissection: an updated meta-analysis.Neurological research and practice · 2022Review
- Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection.Current cardiology reports · 2021Review
- Cervical and intracranial artery dissections.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2021Review
- Bilateral Vertebral Artery Dissection: A Case Report with Literature Review.Case reports in medicine · 2020Article
- Treatment of Extracranial Arterial Dissection: the Roles of Antiplatelet Agents, Anticoagulants, and Stenting.Current treatment options in neurology · 2019Review
- Rivaroxaban in cervical and "cervico-cerebral" artery dissections: a new therapeutic option?Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2019Article
- Bilateral Internal Carotid and Left Vertebral Artery Dissection after Blunt Trauma: A Case Report and Literature Review.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2019Review
- Effects of rivaroxaban on intimal hyperplasia and smooth muscle cell proliferation at the carotid artery anastomosis site in rabbits.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2017Article
- Dissection of Cervical and Cerebral Arteries.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2017Review
- Continuation of direct oral anticoagulants in the acute phase of ischemic stroke. A case series.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical artery dissection (CeAD) patients with or without stroke are frequently treated with either antiplatelet agents or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), but few data are reported on the use of nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs).
methodsBetween November 2011 and January 2014, we recorded data from patients with a stroke due to vertebral (VAD) or internal carotid artery dissection (ICAD). Patients using oral anticoagulants were included in the study and were divided into two treatment groups: patients using NOACs and those using VKAs. Excellent outcome was defined on modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤1 at 6 months.
resultsOf 68 stroke patients (67% male; median age 45 [39-53]), six (8.8%; two with VAD and four with ICAD) were treated with NOACs: three with direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran and three with direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at baseline was 4 (3-7) in the NOAC versus 2 (1-7) in the VKA groups. Complete recanalization at 6 months was seen in most patients in the NOAC (n = 5; 83%) and VKA (n = 34; 55%) groups. All the patients using NOACs had mRS ≤1 at 6 months and none had an intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). In the VKA group most patients (n = 48; 77%) had mRS ≤1, one patient (1.7%) had an ICH and one died.
conclusionsIn this small, consecutive single-center patient sample treating ischemic stroke patients with CeAD with NOACs did not bring up safety concerns and resulted in similar, good outcomes compared to patients using VKAs.
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.