SynthesisHerz2021
New oral anticoagulants for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with peripheral artery disease: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Herz, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNew oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are as effective and safe as warfarin for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Limited evidence is available regarding outcomes for NVAF patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD).
methodsA systematic search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias. All primary publications and secondary analyses comparing NOACs with other oral anticoagulation regimens for the prevention of stroke in patients with both NVAF and PAD from phase III clinical trials were evaluated. The primary outcomes were stroke, systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular (CV) mortality, all-cause mortality, and myocardial infarction (MI).
resultsThree articles were included in this study. The pooled results showed a relative risk for stroke/SE with NOACs of 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-1.39), for major bleeding, 1.12 (95% CI: 0.70-1.81), for ICH, 0.47 (95% CI: 0.16-1.36), for CV mortality, 0.77 (95% CI: 0.57-1.04), for all-cause mortality, 0.91 (95% CI: 0.70-1.19), and for MI, 1.10 (95% CI: 0.64-1.90).
conclusionThe findings show that NOACs are effective and safe for preventing stroke/SE in patients with both NVAF and PAD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32728781What 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.