Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34816745›Full record

Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2021

Effectiveness and Safety of NOAC Versus Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Aortic Stenosis.

Line Melgaard, Thure Filskov Overvad, Martin Jensen, Thomas Decker Christensen, Gregory Y H Lip, Torben Bjerregaard Larsen, Peter Brønnum Nielsen

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Line MelgaardDepartment of Cardiology Aalborg University Hospital Aalborg Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-3538-7968
Thure Filskov OvervadDepartment of Cardiology Aalborg University Hospital Aalborg Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8096-0236
Martin JensenDepartment of Clinical Medicine Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit Faculty of Health Aalborg University Aalborg Denmark.
Thomas Decker ChristensenDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery & Department of Clinical Medicine Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-6509-8510
Gregory Y H LipDepartment of Clinical Medicine Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit Faculty of Health Aalborg University Aalborg Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7566-1626
Torben Bjerregaard LarsenDepartment of Cardiology Aalborg University Hospital Aalborg Denmark.
Peter Brønnum NielsenDepartment of Cardiology Aalborg University Hospital Aalborg Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2922-6970
Aalborg University Hospital · DKAalborg University · DKAarhus University Hospital · DKUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Guideline recommendations on the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with aortic stenosis are based on studies including a low number of patients with aortic stenosis. The aim of this study was to estimate the effects of NOAC versus warfarin on thromboembolism and major bleeding among AF patients with aortic stenosis. Methods and Results We emulated a target trial using observational data from Danish nationwide registries between 2013 and 2018. Thromboembolism was defined as a hospital diagnosis of ischemic stroke and/or systemic embolism, and major bleeding was defined as a hospital diagnosis of intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, or major or clinically relevant bleeding in other anatomic sites. Treatment effect estimates were based on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol approach. A total of 3726 patients with AF and aortic stenosis claimed a prescription for either a NOAC (2357 patients) or warfarin (1369 patients) and met the eligibility criteria for the trial. During 3 years of follow-up, the adjusted hazard ratios for thromboembolism and major bleeding were 1.62 (95% CI, 1.08-2.45) and 0.73 (0.59-0.91) for NOAC compared with warfarin in the intention-to-treat analyses. Similar results were observed in the per-protocol analyses. Conclusions In this observational study, we observed a higher risk of thromboembolism but a lower risk of major bleeding for treatment with NOACs compared with warfarin in patients with AF and aortic stenosis. This observation needs confirmation in large randomized trials in these commonly encountered patients.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsAortic Valve StenosisAtrial FibrillationWarfarinAdministration, OralHemorrhageHumansRisk AssessmentThromboembolismTreatment OutcomeAnticoagulantsWarfarinatrial fibrillationstrokevalvular heart disease

Identifiers

PMID34816745
PMCPMC9075348
OpenAlexW3215733845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.