ArticleEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2022
Dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: the prospective multicentre WOEST 2 Study.
Article in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Personalized Antithrombotic Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review of Risk-Stratified Approaches.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Pooled it
- Aspirin plus clopidogrel versus cilostazol -based triple antiplatelet therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease undergoing PCI: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2025Pooled it
- Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Procedural and Antithrombotic Therapy Optimization in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Narrative Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor patients on oral anticoagulants (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), European guidelines have recently changed their recommendations to dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT; P2Y
aimsThe prospective WOEST 2 registry was designed to obtain contemporary real-world data on antithrombotic regimens and related outcomes after PCI in patients with an indication for OAC.
methodsIn this analysis, we compare DAT (P2Y
resultsA total of 1,075 patients were included between 2014 and 2021. Patients used OAC for atrial fibrillation (93.6%) or mechanical heart valve prosthesis (4.7%). Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC) were prescribed in 53.1% and vitamin K antagonists in 46.9% of patients. At discharge, 60.9% received DAT, and 39.1% TAT. DAT was associated with less clinically relevant and similar major bleeding (16.8% vs 23.4%; p<0.01 and 7.6% vs 7.7%, not significant), compared to TAT. The difference in MACCE between the two groups was not statistically significant (12.4% vs 9.7%; p=0.17). Multivariable adjustment and propensity score matching confirmed these results.
conclusionsDual antithrombotic therapy is associated with a substantially lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding without a statistically significant penalty in ischaemic events.
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.