ArticleCroatian medical journal2020
Patterns of anticoagulation therapy in atrial fibrillation: results from a large real-life single-center registry.
Article in Croatian medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct Oral Anticoagulants vs. Vitamin K Antagonists in Atrial Fibrillation Patients at Risk of Falling: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Real-World Patterns and Outcomes of Anticoagulation Therapy in Pulmonary Embolism: An Observational Dual-Centre Registry Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive thoracoscopic left atrial appendage occlusion compared with transcatheter left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in recurrent nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients after radiofrequency ablation: a prospective cohort study.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2021Article
- The Risk of Falling and Consequences of Falling in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Receiving Different Types of Anticoagulant.Drugs & aging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the differences in the characteristics and clinical outcomes of recently diagnosed patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) receiving different types of anticoagulants in a real-life setting.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the charts of 1000 consecutive patients with non-valvular AF diagnosed at our institution or referred it to from 2013 to 2018.
resultsOver the observed period, the frequency of direct oral anticoagulation (DOAC) therapy use significantly increased (P = 0.002). Patients receiving warfarin had more unfavorable thromboembolic and bleeding risk factors than patients receiving DOAC. Predetermined stroke and major bleeding risks were similarly distributed among the dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban groups. Patients receiving warfarin had shorter time-to-major bleeding (TTB), time to thrombosis (TTT), and overall survival (OS) than patients receiving DOACs. After adjustment for factors unbalanced at baseline, the warfarin group showed significantly shorter OS (hazard ratio 2.27, 95% confidence interval 1.44-3.57, P<0.001], while TTB and TTT did not significantly differ between the groups. Only 37% of patients on warfarin had optimal dosing control, and they did not differ significantly in TTB, TTT, and OS from patients on DOACs.
conclusionWarfarin and DOACs are administered to different target populations, possibly due to socio-economic reasons. Patients receiving warfarin rarely obtain optimal dosing control, and experience significantly shorter survival compared with patients receiving DOACs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33150762PMC7684544W3097029868What 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.