ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2020
Safety and efficacy of uninterrupted treatment with edoxaban or warfarin during the peri-procedural period of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in plasma concentrations of edoxaban and coagulation biomarkers according to thromboembolic risk and atrial fibrillation type in patients undergoing catheter ablation: Subanalysis of KYU-RABLE.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
- Editorial to "Safety and Efficacy of Uninterrupted Treatment with Edoxaban or Warfarin During the Peri-Procedural Period of Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation".Journal of arrhythmia · 2020Article
- Safety and efficacy of uninterrupted treatment with edoxaban or warfarin during the peri-procedural period of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.Journal of arrhythmia · 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
18 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe real-world safety and efficacy of uninterrupted anticoagulation treatment with edoxaban (EDX) or warfarin (WFR) during the peri-procedural period of catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) are yet to be investigated.
methodsWe conducted a two-center experience, observational study to retrospectively investigate consecutive patients who underwent CA for AF and received EDX or WFR. We examined the incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding complications during the peri-procedural period.
resultsThe EDX and WFR groups included 153 and 103 patients, respectively (total: 256 patients). Demise or thromboembolic events did not occur in either of the groups. The incidence of major bleeding in the EDX and WFR groups was 0.7% and 2.9%, respectively. The total incidence of major/minor bleeding in the EDX and WFR groups was 7.8% and 8.7%, respectively. Of note, the incidence of bleeding complications in the uninterrupted WFR strategy group was markedly high in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 (75%) or a HAS-BLED score ≥3 (60%). Patients with eGFR ≥30 and a HAS-BLED score ≤2 had a lower incidence of bleeding (<10%), regardless of the administered anticoagulation drug (EDX or WFR).
conclusionsThis study confirmed the safety and efficacy of uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy using EDX or WFR in real-world patients undergoing CA for AF. Patients with severely impaired renal function and/or a higher bleeding risk during uninterrupted therapy with WFR were at a prominent risk of bleeding. Therefore, particular attention should be paid in the treatment of these patients.
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.