ArticleEuropean stroke journal2017
Antiplatelet therapy following ischaemic stroke - Continue or change pre-existing therapy?
Article in European stroke journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAntiplatelet therapy is routinely prescribed early after ischaemic stroke. Many patients will already be taking antiplatelet therapy and it is unknown whether these patients should continue the same antiplatelet treatment or switch to a different regimen.
methodsWe selected patients with ischaemic stroke from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive database who were prescribed antiplatelets both before and after their stroke and who had detailed records of adverse events after stroke. We compared patients who changed to a new antiplatelet regimen after their stroke to those who continued the same regimen. The primary outcome was recurrent ischaemic stroke within 90 days after their index stroke and the secondary outcome was intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) or extracranial haemorrhage (ECH). We used logistic regression analysis and adjusted for age and baseline NIHSS.
resultsA total of 1129 participants were included. Of these, 538 subjects changed antiplatelet regimen post stroke and 591 continued the same regimen. A recurrent ischaemic event occurred in 4.1% of subjects who changed regimen and 4.3% who continued unchanged (adjusted OR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.54-1.75, DISCUSSION: The analysis was performed using a non-randomised registry data.
conclusionIn patients who suffer ischaemic stroke whilst taking antiplatelets, a change in antiplatelet regimen was not associated with an altered risk of early recurrent ischaemic stroke rate or bleeding. However, the results must be interpreted in view of the low event rates.
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.