Observational studyClinical cardiology2020
Time-trends and treatment gaps in the antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the CHUM AF-STENT Registry.
Observational study in Clinical cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline Adherence As An Indicator of the Extent of Antithrombotic Overuse and Underuse: A Systematic Review.Global heart · 2022Pooled it
- Utilization of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Article
- Longitudinal Patterns in Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulant Era: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Time-trends and treatment gaps in the antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the CHUM AF-STENT Registry.Clinical cardiology · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe management of atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has undergone a rapid recent evolution. In 2016, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) published expert recommendations to help guide clinicians in balancing bleeding and thrombotic risks in these patients. HYPOTHESIS: Antithrombotic regimen prescriptions for AF patients undergoing PCI evolved after the publication of the 2016 CCS AF guidelines.
methodsA prospective cohort of AF patients undergoing PCI with placement of a coronary stent from a single tertiary academic center was analyzed for the recommended antithrombotic regimen at discharge. Prescribing behavior was compared between three time periods (Cohort A [2010-2011]; Cohort B [2014-2015]; Cohort C [2017]) using the χ
resultsA total of 459 patients with AF undergoing PCI were identified. Clinical and procedural characteristics were similar between cohorts, with the exception of an increase in drug-eluting stent (DES) use over time (P < .01). Overall, the rate of oral anticoagulation (OAC) increased over time (P < .01), associated with an increase in nonvitamin K OAC prescription (P < .01) and a concomitant decrease in vitamin K antagonist prescription (P < .01). Despite this, the overall rate of anticoagulation remains below what would be predicted with perfect guideline compliance (75% vs 94%, P < .01).
conclusionThere has been a dramatic shift in clinical practice for AF patients requiring PCI, with increases in prescription of OAC even in the context of an increase in the use of DES. However, room for further practice optimization still exists.
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.