Trial reportJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2021
A randomized comparison of two direct oral anticoagulants for patients undergoing cardiac ablation with a contemporary warfarin control arm.
Trial report in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Optimal Anticoagulant Strategy for Periprocedural Management of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe safety and efficacy of periprocedural use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for atrial fibrillation (AF) remain unclear. We compared the incidence of asymptomatic cerebral micro-thromboembolism and hemopericardium following AF ablation among patients receiving edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin and between normal- and low-dose use of edoxaban and rivaroxaban.
methodsThis prospective randomized study included 170 consecutive AF patients. Patients taking DOACs upon admission to our hospital were randomly assigned to an edoxaban group or to a rivaroxaban group. Warfarin was continued in patients receiving warfarin at admission. All patients underwent AF ablation, and cerebral MRI was performed to evaluate asymptomatic cerebral micro-thromboembolism the day after the procedure.
resultsSixty-one patients were assigned to edoxaban and 63 to rivaroxaban. Warfarin was continued in 46 patients. Although asymptomatic cerebral micro-thromboembolism was detected in 25 patients (16.3%), there were no significant differences among the groups. Hemopericardium occurred in 2 patients (one each in the rivaroxaban and warfarin groups). The incidence of asymptomatic cerebral micro-thromboembolism was higher in the low-dose group (9 patients, 25.7%) than in the normal-dose group (8 patients, 10.0%) for patients prescribed either edoxaban or rivaroxaban (p < 0.05). The proportion of males (88.0%, 69.5%, p < 0.05), history of prior AF ablation (64.0%, 42.2%, p < 0.05), and hypertension (68.0%, 46.1%, p < 0.05) were significantly higher in patients with cerebral thromboembolism.
conclusionsThe incidence of asymptomatic cerebral micro-thromboembolism and hemopericardium in AF ablation was similar among patients using edoxaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin. However, low doses of DOACs may increase the risk of asymptomatic stroke.
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.