ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2015
Continuation of Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Revascularization with a Drug-Eluting Stent: What Duration Is Optimal?
Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of the Asian-Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Score.Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- The Evolving Concept of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Focus on Unique Feature of East Asian and "Asian Paradox".Korean circulation journal · 2018Review
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
Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is required after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DESs) to prevent thrombotic complications, particularly stent thrombosis (ST). However, there is still disagreement regarding the optimal duration of DAPT post-DES placement. Compared to bare metal stents, DESs are known to reduce restenosis and target vessel revascularization but may be more prone to late and very late ST due to delayed endothelialization. Several trials have suggested that longer (>12 months) DAPT reduces ischemic events but does so at the cost of increased bleeding. Other trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of shorter (3 to 6 months) DAPT compared to long-term DAPT, with fewer bleeding events. The clinical challenge is how to balance the reduced ischemic risk with increased bleeding associated with longer DAPT. Furthermore, ST is associated with multiple patient- and procedure-specific factors, thereby limiting a "one-size-fits-all" approach to determining optimal duration of DAPT. The evaluation of DAPT duration should therefore be tailored individually. We will review the data supporting current recommendations for DAPT and recent clinical trials comparing varying DAPT durations and discuss patient- and procedure-specific factors affecting the "optimal" DAPT duration.
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.