ArticleClinical interventions in aging2022
Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Elderly Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Antithrombotics in Geriatric PCI for STEMI: Balancing Ischemic Protection with Bleeding Risk: Short title: Novel Antithrombotics in Geriatric PCI for STEMI.Galen medical journal · 2026Article
- Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with left main Coronary Artery Stenting.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Age is a strong predictor of adverse outcomes due both to a higher risk of bleeding and ischemia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor in elderly patients. Methods: Patients ≥75 years of age admitted to our center from January, 2015 to December, 2019 who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were included in our study. Eligible patients were divided into clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups according to the P2Y Results: Of 1505 patients enrolled in this study, 442 were assigned to ticagrelor group and 1063 were assigned to clopidogrel group. The incidence of BARC 2, 3, and 5 bleeding (HR, 2.304; 95% CI, 1.540-3.447), and any bleeding (HR, 2.476; 95% CI, 1.802-3.403) in ticagrelor group was significantly higher than clopidogrel group. There were no significant difference between the two groups with respect to BARC 3 and 5 bleeding (HR, 1.566; 95% CI, 0.767-3.198) and MACCEs (HR, 0.957; 95% CI, 0.702-1.305). Conclusion: Compared with clopidogrel, DAPT with ticagrelor significantly increased the risk of BARC 2, 3, and 5 bleeding without reducing MACCEs in elderly patients who underwent PCI. Trial Registration: The study was retrospectively registered in
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.