ReviewCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2018
The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stent implantation: to go too far is as bad as to fall short.
Review in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Antiplatelet Therapy in Chronic Coronary Artery Disease Patients With a History of Angioplasty. When is Aspirin Not Enough? A Systematic Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Dual antiplatelet therapy in GI-bleed patients with extensive coronary artery disease history: a systematic review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Individualization of Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Coronary Stenting: A Comprehensive, Evidence-Based Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Is the answer to clinical questions provided by Bayesian network meta-analysis? Regarding the optimal duration of DAPT and the best subsequent SAPT.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2021Article
- Towards Personalized Antithrombotic Treatments: Focus on P2YClinical pharmacokinetics · 2019Review
- Antithrombotic Therapy for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions: From Coronary Artery Disease to Structural Heart Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- Inpatient prescribing of dual antiplatelet therapy according to the guidelines: a prospective intervention study.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor is key for secondary prevention of recurrent coronary ischemic events and stent thrombosis. For this purpose, DAPT showed superior efficacy compared to aspirin alone, but it is also associated with an increased risk of major, and potentially fatal, bleeding. Hence, while secondary prevention with aspirin monotherapy is generally maintained for an indefinite period, the duration of DAPT after the index event is still debated. Multiple trials have challenged the guideline recommended standard of care of 12 months of DAPT duration. These studies tested on one side a treatment reduction to 6 or 3 months, and on the other side an extension of treatment beyond 12 months in order to define the optimal DAPT duration maximizing the anti-ischemic protection and minimizing bleeding. In this document we sought to summarize the existing evidence from more than 18 randomized controlled trials in the field, and discuss the benefit and risks of prolonging/shortening DAPT duration. In addition, a specific focus on treatment individualization will outline the current, evidence-based, decision-making process for optimal DAPT duration selection after coronary stenting.
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.