SynthesisMedicine2020
Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants with warfarin in Latin American patients with atrial fibrillation.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Warfarin in Latin American Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Evidence From FourFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Predictors of use of direct oral anticoagulants in acute pulmonary embolism.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in current management of atrial fibrillation (AF) are predominantly derived from North American and European regions. However, the effects of NOACs for stroke prevention in Latin America remain unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of NOACs with warfarin in Latin American patients with AF.
methodsThe PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched until July 12, 2019 for applicable randomized clinical trials. The risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model.
resultsFour trials involving 8943 Latin American patients were included in this meta-analysis. In anticoagulated patients with AF, Latin American patients had higher rates of stroke or systemic embolism and all-cause death compared with non-Latin American subjects. Compared with warfarin use, the use of NOACs was significantly associated with reduced risks of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and any bleeding in Latin American patients. There were no significant differences in the risks of ischemic stroke, all-cause death, and gastrointestinal bleeding between Latin and non-Latin American groups. All the interactions between Latin and non-Latin American groups about efficacy and safety outcomes of NOACs compared with warfarin were non-significant (all Pinteraction > .05).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis suggested that the use of NOACs was at least non-inferior to warfarin use for stroke prevention in Latin American patients with AF.
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.