ArticleSurgery today2021
Continuation of aspirin perioperatively for lung resection: a propensity matched analysis.
Article in Surgery today, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo clarify the safety and effectiveness of continuing aspirin during the perioperative period of lung resection.
methodsWe analyzed, retrospectively, consecutive patients who underwent lung resection between 2008 and 2017. To investigate the safety of aspirin continuation, patients who continued taking aspirin perioperatively (Group C) were matched to other patients (Group O), using a propensity score, and bleeding outcomes were compared. To assess the effect of aspirin interruption, Group C was matched to a group of patients whose aspirin regimen was interrupted (Group I), and the postoperative complications related to thromboembolism were compared.
resultsAmong 3393 patients, 52 continued on aspirin (Group C) perioperatively, whereas 184 had their aspirin discontinued (Group I). Comparing the matched cohorts extracted from Group C and Group O (n = 45), there were no significant differences in bleeding outcomes. Comparing the matched cohorts extracted from Group C and Group I (n = 40), group C had fewer postoperative complications related to thromboembolism (0% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.039).
conclusionBleeding complications did not increase by continuing aspirin, but thromboembolic complications increased when the aspirin regimen was interrupted during the perioperative period of lung resection. Thus, in the absence of a prohibitive bleeding risk, the continuation of aspirin during the perioperative period of lung resection appears to be desirable.
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.