ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2020
Safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants compared to Vitamin K antagonists postpercutaneous coronary interventions in patients with atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2020. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease (CAD) are commonly associated. Cotreatment with multiple antithrombotic agents can increase the risk of bleeding. We sought to evaluate patient-centered outcomes in patients with AF on double therapy with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared to patients with standard triple therapy, [a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) plus dual antiplatelet therapy].
methodsWe performed a literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting outcomes of patients receiving double therapy with DOACs compared to triple therapy with VKAs in patients with AF undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Patient-centered outcomes were the International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH) major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNB), all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and stroke.
resultsFour RCTs (9602 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Compared to VKAs, DOACs were associated with significantly lower ISTH major bleeding/ CRNB (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67-0.82,
conclusionCompared with triple therapy with VKAS, double therapy with DOACs is associated with a reduced risk of bleeding and is as effective in patients with AF undergoing PCI.
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.