SynthesisClinical cardiology2021
Benefit and risk of adding rivaroxaban in patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Management in Korea: Full Version Recommendation of the Korean Diabetes Association.Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2024Guideline
- Benefit and risk of adding rivaroxaban in patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2021Pooled it
- The role of rivaroxaban in the management of coronary artery disease: an overview of five landmark clinical trials.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- 2025 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Management in Korea: Recommendation of the Korean Diabetes Association.Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2025Article
- Rivaroxaban: Expanded Role in Cardiovascular Disease Management-A Literature Review.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration have, respectively, approved rivaroxaban for the prevention of recurrent major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with myocardial infarction and stable coronary artery disease, its efficacy and safety is unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the benefit and risk of adding rivaroxaban in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients, focusing on treatment effects stratified by different baseline clinical presentations. HYPOTHESIS: There are differences in treatment effects of adding rivaroxaban among CAD patients with different baseline clinical presentations.
methodsMedline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases were systematically searched from inception to 21 July 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rivaroxaban in CAD patients. The primary efficacy endpoint and safety endpoint were assessed by using Mantel-Haenszel pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsFive RCTs that included 43 650 patients were identified. Patients receiving rivaroxaban had a significantly lower risk of the primary efficacy endpoint (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97, p = .01) accompanied by increased risk of the primary safety endpoint (RR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.10-3.05, p = .02). Subgroup analyses showed that in males the risk-benefit appears to be more favorable while in patients ≥65 years, in females, in patients with diabetes, those with mild to moderate impaired renal function, and region of Asia/other seems unfavorable.
conclusionRivaroxaban may provide an additional choice for secondary prevention in CAD patients. However, careful estimation of the risk of ischemic and bleeding events using patient characteristics are critical to achieving net benefit.
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.