ArticleJRSM cardiovascular disease
Ischemic and bleeding outcomes of triple therapy in patients on chronic anticoagulation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Article in JRSM cardiovascular disease. 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.
- The Rate of Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation according to Antithrombotic Strategy: The COOL-AF Registry.Cardiovascular 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTriple therapy (TT) that includes oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended in patients who are on chronic anticoagulation and undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness and safety of TT compared to double therapy (DT), which consists of an oral anticoagulation and one of the P2Y12 inhibitors, have shown increased risk of bleeding; however, none of the individual studies were powered to show a difference in ischemic outcomes. To compare the clinical outcomes of TT and DT, we performed this meta-analysis of RCTs.
methodsElectronic search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was performed for RCTs comparing TT and DT in patients who were on oral anticoagulation (Vitamin K antagonist or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant) who underwent PCI. All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis (ST) and TIMI major and minor bleeding were the major outcomes.
resultsAn analysis of 5 trials including 10,592 total patients showed that TT, compared to DT, resulted in non-significant difference in risk of all-cause [odds ratio (OR); 1.14;95% confidence interval (CI):(0.80-1.63);
conclusionCompared to DT, the patients receiving TT are at a higher risk of major and minor bleeding with no survival benefit or impact on thrombotic outcomes.
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.