SynthesisBMJ open2021
Direct oral anticoagulants in treatment of cerebral venous thrombosis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Apixaban for the Treatment of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis: A Single-Centre Experience and Systematic Review of the Literature.CNS drugs · 2023Pooled it
- Guideline
- Trial
- Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Pathophysiologic Insights, Clinical Evaluation Tools, and Novel Therapeutic Strategies.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Venous Thromboembolism in Unusual Locations.The Medical clinics of North America · 2025Review
- Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in the Management of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis-Where Do We Stand?Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Cerebral Vein Thrombosis and Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Effectiveness of rivaroxaban in preventing cerebral venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in long-term management of cerebral venous thrombosis: A comprehensive meta-analysis.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of Apixaban in the treatment of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: a multi-center study.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- State of the art in cerebral venous sinus thrombosis animal models.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2022Review
- Warfarin versus factor Xa inhibitors in the long-term treatment of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis a single-center retrospective analysis.eNeurologicalSci · 2022Article
- Dabigatran in Cerebral Sinus Vein Thrombosis and Thrombophilia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis as the initial presentation of essential thrombocythemia - A case report and literature review.eNeurologicalSci · 2022Article
- Updates in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
- Evidence-Based Minireview: Should warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant be used in patients presenting with thrombosis in the splanchnic or cerebral veins?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2021Review
- [Diagnostic and treatment recommendations from the FACME ad-hoc expert working group on the management of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis associated with COVID-19 vaccination].Neurologia (Barcelona, Spain)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCurrent guidelines do not recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) to treat cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) despite their benefits over standard therapy. We performed a systematic review to summarise the published experience of DOAC therapy in CVT. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase and COCHRANE databases up to 18 November 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All published articles of patients with CVT treated with DOAC were included. Studies without follow-up information were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers screened articles and extracted data. A risk of bias analysis was performed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Safety data included mortality, intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) or other adverse events. Efficacy data included recurrent CVT, recanalisation rates and disability by modified Rankin Scales (mRS).
results33 studies met inclusion criteria. One randomised controlled trial, 5 observational cohorts and 27 case series or studies reported 279 patients treated with DOAC for CVT: 41% dabigatran, 47% rivaroxaban, 10% apixaban and 2% edoxaban, in addition to 315 patients treated with standard therapy. The observational cohorts showed a similar risk of death in DOAC and standard therapy arms (RR 2.12, 95% CI 0.29 to 15.59). New ICH was reported in 2 (0.7%) DOAC-treated patients and recurrent CVT occurred in 4 (1.5%). A favourable mRS between 0 and 2 was reported in 94% of DOAC-treated patients, more likely than standard therapy in observational cohorts (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25).
conclusionThe evidence for DOAC use in CVT is limited although suggests sufficient safety and efficacy despite variability in timing and dose of treatment. This systematic review highlights that further rigorous trials are needed to validate these findings and to determine optimal treatment regimens.
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.