ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Consensus Decision-Making for the Management of Antiplatelet Therapy before Non-Cardiac Surgery in Patients Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents: A Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A New Risk Prediction Tool for Bleeding and Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Pre-Existing Coronary Stents Undergoing Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Comparison of Prognostic Value of 10 Biochemical Indices at Admission for Prediction Postoperative Myocardial Injury and Hospital Mortality in Patients with Osteoporotic Hip Fracture.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Consensus Decision-Making for the Management of Antiplatelet Therapy before Non-Cardiac Surgery in Patients Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents: A Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Although antiplatelet therapy (APT) has been recommended to balance ischemic-bleeding risks, it has been left to an individualized decision-making based on physicians' perspectives before non-cardiac surgery. The study aimed to assess the advantages of a consensus among physicians, surgeons, and anesthesiologists on continuation and regimen of preoperative APT in patients with coronary drug-eluting stents. Methods and Results A total of 3582 adult patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation stents was retrospectively included from a multicenter cohort. Physicians determined whether APT should be continued or discontinued for a recommended period before non-cardiac surgery. There were 3103 patients who complied with a consensus decision. Arbitrary APT, not based on a consensus decision, was associated with urgent surgery, high bleeding risk of surgery, female sex, and dual APT at the time of preoperative evaluation. Arbitrary APT independently increased the net clinical adverse event (adjusted odds ratio [OR
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.