ReviewTherapeutic advances in cardiovascular disease
Evolving paradigms in antithrombotic therapy for anticoagulated patients undergoing coronary stenting.
Review in Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Cancer; Balancing between Ischemic and Bleeding Risk: A Narrative Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
- Evolving Antithrombotic Treatment Patterns for Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: A Cross-Sectional Study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Net clinical benefit of antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation patients with stable coronary artery disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Changes of antithrombotic prescription in atrial fibrillation patients with acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention and the subsequent impact on long-term outcomes: a longitudinal cohort study.Thrombosis journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A sizable proportion of coronary artery disease (CAD) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation have an indication for treatment with oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC). The coexistence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and the need for PCI expose patients to a higher risk of developing thrombotic complications, and a multitargeted antithrombotic treatment strategy, addressing both platelet- and coagulation-mediated triggering mechanisms of thrombosis, is necessary for ensuring full protection from ischemic hazards. The increased bleeding risk identified with triple antithrombotic therapy has driven the search for alternative treatment modalities and pharmacological combination strategies aimed at achieving an optimal balance between safety and efficacy in this complex clinical scenario. Over a short time period, the paradigms surrounding the management of patients undergoing PCI who require OAC have substantially evolved. In this review, we summarize and critically evaluate the results of recent randomized clinical trials investigating the pharmacological management of patients who, in addition to antiplatelet therapy, have an indication for OAC treatment before or at the time of a PCI procedure.
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.