ArticleScientific reports2020
Impact of bleeding during dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Association Between Peripheral Arterial Disease and Long-Term Bleeding Events in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Sinomenine protects against atherosclerosis in apolipoprotein E-knockout mice by inhibiting of inflammatory pathway.Inflammopharmacology · 2024Article
- Identification of 5 hub genes for diagnosis of coronary artery disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Incidence, Prediction, and Outcomes of Major Bleeding After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chinese Patients.JACC. Asia · 2022Article
- The Effect of Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients on Aspirin Therapy until Surgery Day.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This nationwide retrospective cohort study used the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan to compare the impact of bleeding on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) versus chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). Between July 2007 and December 2010, patients with AMI (n = 15,391) and CCS (n = 19,724) who received dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting were identified from the database. AMI was associated with increased risks of MI (AMI vs. CCS: 0.38 vs. 0.16 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01), all-cause death (0.49 vs. 0.32 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01), and BARC type 3 bleeding (0.22 vs. 0.13 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01) at 1 year compared with CCS, while the risk of BARC type 2 bleeding was marginally higher in the CCS patients than in the AMI patients (1.32 vs. 1.4 per 100 person-months; p = 0.06). Bleeding was an independent predictor of MI, stroke, and all-cause death in this East Asian population, regardless of the initial presentation. Among the patients with bleeding, AMI was associated with a higher risk of ischemic events at 1 year after bleeding compared with CCS (MI: 0.34 vs. 0.25 per 100 patient-months; p = 0.06; ischemic stroke: 0.22 vs. 0.13 per 100 patient-months; p = 0.02). The 1-year mortality after bleeding was comparable between the two groups after propensity score weighting. In conclusion, bleeding conferred an increased risk of adverse outcomes in East Asian patients with AMI and CCS.
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.