Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27579543›Full record

Observational studyArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2016

Fondaparinux versus Enoxaparin - Which is the Best Anticoagulant for Acute Coronary Syndrome? - Brazilian Registry Data.

Alexandre de Matos Soeiro, Pedro Gabriel Melo de Barros E Silva, Eduardo Alberto de Castro Roque, Aline Siqueira Bossa, Maria Cristina César, Sheila Aparecida Simões, Mariana Yumi Okada, Tatiana de Carvalho Andreucci Torres Leal, Fátima Cristina Monteiro Pedroti, Múcio Tavares de Oliveira

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexandre de Matos SoeiroUnidade Clínica de Emergência - Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil.
Pedro Gabriel Melo de Barros E SilvaHospital TotalCor, São Paulo, SP - Brazil.
Eduardo Alberto de Castro RoqueHospital Metropolitano, Serra, ES - Brazil.
Aline Siqueira BossaUnidade Clínica de Emergência - Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil.
Maria Cristina CésarUnidade Clínica de Emergência - Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil.
Sheila Aparecida SimõesHospital TotalCor, São Paulo, SP - Brazil.
Mariana Yumi OkadaHospital TotalCor, São Paulo, SP - Brazil.
Tatiana de Carvalho Andreucci Torres LealUnidade Clínica de Emergência - Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil.
Fátima Cristina Monteiro PedrotiHospital Metropolitano, Serra, ES - Brazil.
Múcio Tavares de OliveiraUnidade Clínica de Emergência - Instituto do Coração (InCor) do Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo - Brazil.
Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo · BRHospital TotalCor · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background: Recent studies have shown fondaparinux's superiority over enoxaparin in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (ACS), especially in relation to bleeding reduction. The description of this finding in a Brazilian registry has not yet been documented.

objective: To compare fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in in-hospital prognosis of non-ST elevation ACS.

methods: Multicenter retrospective observational study. A total of 2,282 patients were included (335 in the fondaparinux group, and 1,947 in the enoxaparin group) between May 2010 and May 2015. Demographic, medication intake and chosen coronary treatment data were obtained. Primary outcome was mortality from all causes. Secondary outcome was combined events (cardiogenic shock, reinfarction, death, stroke and bleeding). Comparison between the groups were done through Chi-Square test and T test. Multivariate analysis was done through logistic regression, with significance values defined as p < 0.05.

results: With regards to treatment, we observed the performance of a percutaneous coronary intervention in 40.2% in the fondaparinux group, and in 35.1% in the enoxaparin group (p = 0.13). In the multivariate analysis, we observed significant differences between fondaparinux and enoxaparin groups in relation to combined events (13.8% vs. 22%. OR = 2.93, p = 0.007) and bleeding (2.3% vs. 5.2%, OR = 4.55, p = 0.037), respectively.

conclusion: Similarly to recently published data in international literature, fondaparinux proved superior to enoxaparin for the Brazilian population, with significant reduction of combined events and bleeding. FUNDAMENTO:: Estudos recentes têm apresentado superioridade do fondaparinux em relação à enoxaparina em pacientes com síndrome coronariana aguda (SCA) sem supradesnivelamento de ST, principalmente relacionada à redução de sangramentos. A descrição desse achado em registro brasileiro ainda não foi documentada. OBJETIVO:: Comparar fondaparinux versus enoxaparina no prognóstico intrahospitalar em SCA sem supradesnivelamento de ST. MÉTODOS:: Estudo retrospectivo, multicêntrico e observacional. Foram incluídos 2.282 pacientes (335 no grupo fondaparinux e 1.947 no grupo enoxaparina) entre maio de 2.010 e maio de 2.015. Foram obtidos dados demográficos, medicações utilizadas e tratamento coronariano adotado. O desfecho primário foi mortalidade por todas as causas. O desfecho secundário foi eventos combinados (choque cardiogênico, reinfarto, morte, acidente vascular cerebral e sangramentos). A comparação entre os grupos foi realizada por meio de Q-quadrado e teste-T. A análise multivariada foi realizada por regressão logística, sendo considerado significativo p < 0,05. RESULTADOS:: Em relação ao tratamento, observou-se realização de intervenção coronária percutânea em 40,2% no grupo fondaparinux e 35,1% no grupo enoxaparina (p = 0,13). Na análise multivariada, observaram-se diferenças significativas entre os grupos fondaparinux e enoxaparina em relação a eventos combinados (13,8% vs. 22%, OR = 2,93, p = 0,007) e sangramentos (2,3% vs. 5,2%, OR = 4,55, p = 0,037), respectivamente. CONCLUSÃO:: Semelhante aos dados recentemente publicados na literatura mundial, fondaparinux mostrou-se superior à enoxaparina para a população brasileira, com redução significativa de eventos combinados e sangramentos.

Indexed as

Acute Coronary SyndromeAgedAnticoagulantsBrazilEnoxaparinFemaleFondaparinuxHemorrhageHospital MortalityHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPolysaccharidesReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesAnticoagulantsEnoxaparinFondaparinuxPolysaccharides

Identifiers

PMID27579543
PMCPMC5053192
OpenAlexW2525173327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.