Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35386093›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2022

DOACs and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Management: Can We Find the Right Balance Between Efficacy and Harm.

Feng Gao, Faisal Rahman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Coronary Artery Disease in CKD-G5D Patients: An Update.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023
    Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Feng GaoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Faisal RahmanSection of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. faisal.rahman@bcm.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7946-0311
Baylor College of Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe balance between efficacy and harm remains a challenge in the adoption of non-vitamin K antagonist direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary atherosclerotic disease prevention. We provide a comprehensive review of the evidence for and against the addition of DOACs to the current management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including stable coronary artery disease (CAD), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). RECENT

findingsThe DOAC class exerts pleiotropic effects on atherosclerotic progression through coagulation and inflammatory pathways. In ACS, low-dose DOAC provides no added efficacy in the setting of dual antiplatelet therapy; however, full-dose DOAC increases bleeding. Efficacy-safety profile favor use of low-dose rivaroxaban in select stable CAD or PAD patients. Atrial fibrillation patients undergoing PCI resort to dual therapy with DOAC due to prohibitory bleeding with triple anti-thrombotic therapy. Evidence favors DOAC use in CAD and PAD; however, careful individual considerations must be undertaken.

Indexed as

Acute Coronary SyndromeAtherosclerosisAtrial FibrillationCoronary Artery DiseasePercutaneous Coronary InterventionAdministration, OralAnticoagulantsHemorrhageHumansPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAnticoagulantsPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAcute coronary syndromeAtherosclerosisNon-vitamin K oral anticoagulantsSecondary preventionStable coronary artery diseaseStable ischemic heart disease

Identifiers

PMID35386093
OpenAlexW4225892138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.