ReviewCureus2021
Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Stent Implantation, Still an Enigma: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Review in Cureus, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review on the effects of drug-coated balloon therapy on plaque morphology in patients with acute coronary syndrome.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Review
- Review
- Pharmacologic targeting of coagulation factors XII and XI by monoclonal antibodies reduces thrombosis in nitinol stents under flow.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is used in patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation to prevent stent thrombosis and ischemic events. The ideal duration of DAPT in patients after DES implantation is a topic of debate among clinicians. In the past, many research studies were published related to an optimal duration of DAPT after DES implantation. In common practice, DAPT should be continued for one year or more after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) followed by DES implantation. The duration of DAPT is significant as long-term DAPT has beneficial effects but is associated with side effects like bleeding. On the other hand, short-term DAPT has a lower risk of bleeding, but it increases the rate of stent thrombosis or ischemic events. Our aim in this systematic review is to solve the dispute regarding the duration of DAPT after DES implantation. So, we tried to find the efficacy and safety of short-term (six months) DAPT by compiling data from randomized control trials (RCTs). We conducted this systematic review following the guidelines defined in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. We searched for our data from multiple databases like PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. We reviewed 10964 studies and then applied inclusion/exclusion criteria and PRISMA guidelines. Finally, we were left with only 21 studies regarding the optimal duration of DAPT after DES implantation. Our systematic review will help determine the non-inferiority of short-term (six months) DAPT to long-term (12 months) DAPT. Furthermore, we also noticed with short-term (six months) DAPT, there was decreased incidence of bleeding as compared to DAPT for long-term. But more studies were required to establish the safety and effectiveness of short-term (six months) DAPT compared to long-term (12 months) DAPT in patients after DES implantation.
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.