ArticleClinical drug investigation2020
Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in the Secondary Stroke Prevention of Elderly Patients: Ljubljana Registry of Secondary Stroke Prevention.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) Versus Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Prior Stroke: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2023Pooled it
- Outcomes of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants for secondary prevention in ischemic stroke with atrial fibrillation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Direct oral anticoagulants for secondary stroke prevention in patients over 80 years of age: the role of geriatric functional status.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe results of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) can mostly be applied to primary prevention in relatively young patients, since only a minority of patients included in these trials were receiving DOACs for secondary prevention. The real-life secondary prevention subgroup, comprising mostly elderly and high-risk patients, remains a point of interest where further exploration is needed. Our objective was to explore the effectiveness and safety of DOACs for secondary prevention in the real-life conditions.
methodsIn a six-year (2012-2018) period all consecutive patients with a history of transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or stroke, recorded NVAF and prescription of DOAC, were included in this single-centre registry. Choice of the DOAC and dose was based on the discretion of the attending clinician. Data regarding recurrent stroke/TIA or other embolic events, intracranial haemorrhage, other major bleeding, adherence and potential changes of therapy were collected and analysed.
resultsDuring the study period, 566 patients were prescribed a DOAC for secondary stroke prevention, and follow-up data were available for 510 patients, with an average observational time of 2.6 years. The mean age of patients was 77.9 ± 8.7 years. The mean CHA
conclusionsOur real-life data study suggests that secondary stroke prevention with DOACs is as effective and safe as primary prevention, both in standard and reduced doses, in a typical group of patients who are older than patients included in RCTs.
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.