ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2022
Antithrombotic strategy and its relationship with outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation and chronic coronary syndrome.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2022. 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.
- Spectrum of Non-Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease and Its Relationship with Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to explore antithrombotic strategy and its relationship with outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at high risk for stroke and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) in real-world clinical practice. Patients with AF at high risk for stroke complicated with CCS from China Atrial Fibrillation Registry (CAFR) were enrolled. The patients were divided into non-antithrombotic (Non-AT) group, oral anticoagulants (OAC) group, antiplatelet therapy (APT) group (aspirin or clopidogrel), and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) group (aspirin + clopidogrel) according to their antithrombotic strategies at baseline. The patients with OAC + single antiplatelet drug (14 cases) and OAC + dual antiplatelet therapy (7 cases) were excluded for the small sample size. The primary effectiveness outcome was the composite outcome of coronary events, thromboembolism, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding events. From 2011 to 2018, 25,512 patients were included in the CARF study, 769 patients with AF at high risk for stroke and CCS were enrolled in this study. After a follow-up of 47.4 ± 25.3 months, the incidences of primary effectiveness outcome were 44.6%, 25.7%, 43.6%, and 29.1% in the four groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The incidences of primary effectiveness and all-cause mortality were both significantly lower in the OAC group than in the Non-AT group, (25.7% vs. 44.6%, HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.39-0.73, P < 0.001) and (14.6% vs. 38.5%, HR 0.36, 95%CI 0.25-0.52, P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, age (HR 1.03, 95%CI 1.01-1.05, P = 0.015), heart failure (HR 1.67, 95%CI 1.20-2.33, P = 0.002) and OAC (HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.47-0.91, P = 0.012) were independent factors for the composite outcome. There was no significant difference in major bleeding events between the four groups. OAC monotherapy significantly reduced the primary effectiveness composite outcome and all-cause mortality in the patients with AF at high risk for stroke complicated with CCS. However, there was no significant difference in major bleeding among the different antithrombotic strategies.Trial Registration www.chictr.org.cn (No. ChiCTR-OCH-13003729).
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.