ArticleEuropean stroke journal2021
Rationale, Design and Methods of the Prospective Record of the Use of Dabigatran in Patients with Acute Stroke or TIA (PRODAST) Study.
Article in European stroke journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prior Anticoagulation and Risk of Hemorrhagic Transformation in Acute Stroke: A Post Hoc Analysis of the PRODAST Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Observational
- Efficacy and safety of oral factor Xa inhibitors versus vitamin-K antagonists in the early phase after acute ischemic stroke or TIA in the real-world setting: The PRODAST study.European stroke journal · 2024Observational
- [What is confirmed in the treatment of ischemic stroke].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Early or late initiation of dabigatran versus vitamin-K-antagonists in acute ischemic stroke or TIA: The PRODAST study.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal timing of anticoagulation following acute ischaemic stroke or TIA in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequent challenge. Early initiation of anticoagulation can reduce the risk for recurrent ischaemic events, but may lead to an increased risk for intracerebral haemorrhage. Aim: The Prospective Record of the Use of Dabigatran in Patients with Acute Stroke or TIA (PRODAST) study was initiated to investigate outcome events under antithrombotic therapy after ischaemic stroke or TIA in patients with AF. The main objective is to compare the three-month rates of major haemorrhagic events between early (≤ 7 days) versus late (> 7 days) administration of dabigatran or treatment with vitamin-K antagonists started at any time. Occurrences of ischaemic and major haemorrhagic events will be evaluated to determine the optimal time point for initiation or resumption of anticoagulation. Design and Methods: PRODAST is a prospective, multicenter, observational, non-interventional post-authorization safety study. 10,000 patients with recent (≤ 1 week from index event) ischaemic stroke or TIA and non-valvular AF were recruited at 86 German sites starting in July 2015. The observational plan includes a baseline visit, documentation of data during hospitalization and a telephone-based, central follow-up at three months after the index event. The primary endpoint is the major bleeding rate within three months. Secondary endpoints include rates of recurrent ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke, TIA, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction and death. Summary: PRODAST will provide important real-world data on safety and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy after acute stroke and TIA 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.