ReviewGastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench2020
An algorithmic approach to gastrointestinal bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic agents.
Review in Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discovery and management of arteriovenous malformation with jejunal diverticulum: elusive gastrointestinal bleed.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Narrative Review of Management Strategies and Risk Mitigation for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Receiving Warfarin.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastrointestinal bleeding is an overwhelming complication of patients taking antithrombotic agents. These drugs pose a challenge to physicians in the management of bleeding to establish hemostasis without putting these patients at a higher risk for thromboembolism. This study aims to propose an algorithmic approach to four major groups of patients receiving antithrombotic agents (single antiplatelet agents, dual antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants and direct oral anticoagulants) to decide when and how these drugs should be held or restarted to offset between the risk of re-bleeding and thromboembolism. Four case-based algorithms are proposed in this article based on some relevant articles. Having designed four case-based algorithms, we are hoping to guide physicians who face a dilemma on the management of patients receiving antithrombotics when gastrointestinal bleeding occurs. Patients using antithrombotics referred for gastrointestinal bleeding were stratified into four groups based on the medication which is used as an antithrombotic agent and four algorithms were designed which are presented here. We have made an attempt to have a stepwise approach to four cases relevant to the study and have an evaluation on the management of their antithrombotic agents during an episode of gastrointestinal bleeding. It is widely accepted that antithrombotic agents should be restarted as soon as possible after the establishment of hemostasis in a patient taking antithrombotics referring for gastrointestinal bleeding. The time for resuming these drugs is different based on the severity of bleeding, the probability of thromboembolic events, and the nature of the antithrombotic medication which is used by the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33584999PMC7881411W3132331005What 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.