ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2020
Sex-Related Differences in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis From 4 Postapproval Studies.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex-Based Outcomes of P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Three Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Trial
- Sex-Specific Differences in Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from the TAILOR-PCI Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2022Trial
- Clinical Outcomes in Anemic Women Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
- Sex differences in coronary artery disease.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Need for Engagement in Stroke Prevention Shared Decision-Making in Older Adults with Atrial Fibrillation and Multimorbidity.Advances in geriatric medicine and research · 2025Article
- Changing clinical perspectives on sex and healthcare disparities in ischaemic heart disease.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Review
- Antiplatelet Therapy in Myocardial Bridge: Insights From the RIALTO Registry.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Observational
- Age and sex differences in the efficacy of early invasive strategy for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: A comparative analysis in stable patients.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Sex differences based on the timing of invasive management among patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: an individual patient data meta-analysis.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Sex-based Differences in Complications Following Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Can Artificial Intelligence Change our Interpretation of Cardiovascular Risk Scores?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
- Two-year outcomes of endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal arterial lesions for patients with high bleeding risk.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- Gender-differences in antithrombotic therapy across the spectrum of ischemic heart disease: Time to tackle the Yentl syndrome?Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- In-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome medically treated with dual anti-platelet therapy: Associated factors and impact on mortality.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Sex-Based Differences in Bleeding Risk After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Implications for the Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Criteria.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Sex-Related Differences in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis From 4 Postapproval Studies.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 15 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Women have been associated with higher rates of recurrent events after percutaneous coronary intervention than men, possibly attributable to advanced age at presentation and greater comorbidities. These factors also put women at higher risk of bleeding, which may influence therapeutic strategies and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results We performed a patient-level pooled analysis of 4 postapproval registries to evaluate sex-related differences in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. HBR required fulfillment of at least 1 major or 2 minor criteria of the Academic Research Consortium definition. Outcomes of interest were major bleeding and major adverse cardiac events (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite/probable stent thrombosis). Of the total 10 502 patients, 2832 (27.0%) were women. The prevalence of HBR was higher in women compared with men (29.0% versus 20.5%,
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.