ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2018
Lights and shadows of long-term dual antiplatelet therapy in "real life" clinical scenarios.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Duration and clinical outcome of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective cohort study using a medical information database from Japanese hospitals.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is a cornerstone of treatment for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Mounting evidences have opened the debate about the optimal DAPT duration. Considering the ACS-pathophysiology, the most recent guidelines recommend DAPT in all ACS patients for at least 12 months unless there are contraindications such as excessive risk of bleeding. Thus, it can be considered acceptable earlier discontinuation if the risk of morbidity from bleeding outweighs the anticipated benefit. On the other hand, several studies have clearly indicated that a significant burden of platelet related-events, such as stroke and new ACS might occur after this period, suggesting that potential benefits might derive by prolonging DAPT beyond 12 months (Long DAPT). Indeed, although current guidelines give some indications about patients eligible for Long DAPT, they do not embrace several real-life clinical scenarios. Thus, in such scenarios, how to decide whether a patient is eligible for Long DAPT or not might be still challenging for clinicians. This position paper presents and discusses various "real-life" clinical scenarios in ACS patients, in order to propose several possible recommendations to overcome guidelines potential limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29943351What 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.