ArticleCardiovascular therapeutics2022
The Rate of Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation according to Antithrombotic Strategy: The COOL-AF Registry.
Article in Cardiovascular therapeutics, 2022. 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.
- Incidence and Predictors of Anticoagulant-Associated Bleeding in Patients With Venous Thromboembolism.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Atrial Fibrillation Advances in Asia: Better Late Than Never.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Net clinical benefit of oral anticoagulants in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation based on a CHABMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and death are common outcomes in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, so appropriate antithrombotic therapy is crucial. The objective of this study was to investigate the rate of ischemic stroke/TIA, major bleeding, and death compared among AF patients who received oral anticoagulant (OAC) alone, antiplatelet alone, or OAC plus antiplatelet. Methods: Prospective data from the COOL-AF Registry (Thailand's largest multicenter nationwide AF registry) were analyzed. Clinical, laboratory, and medication data were collected at baseline and during follow-up. Clinical outcomes, including ischemic stroke/TIA, major bleeding, and death, were collected. Results: There were 3,148 patients included. Mean age was 68.1 ± 10.8 years and 1,826 (57.7%) were male. AF was paroxysmal in 998 (31.7%), persistent in 603 (19.2%), and permanent in 1,547 (49.1%). The mean follow-up duration was 25.7 ± 10.6 months. The median rates of ischemic stroke/TIA, major bleeding, and death were 1.49 (1.21-1.81), 2.29 (1.94-2.68), and 3.89 (3.43-4.40) per 100 person-years. Antiplatelet alone, OAC plus antiplatelet, and OAC alone were used in 582 (18.5%), 308 (9.8%), and 2,258 (71.7%) patients, respectively. Antiplatelet alone significantly increased the risk of ischemic stroke/TIA and death compared to OAC alone. OAC plus antiplatelet significantly increased the risk of death compared to OAC alone. Conclusions: Antiplatelet was used in 890 (28.3%) AF, of whom 582 (18.5%) received antiplatelet alone, and 308 (9.8%) received antiplatelet and OAC. OAC plus antiplatelet significantly increased the risk of death without additional stroke prevention benefit. Antiplatelet alone should not be used in patients with AF.
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.