Observational studyInternational journal of clinical practice2022
Different Oral Antithrombotic Therapy for the Treatment of Ventricular Thrombus: An Observational Study from 2010 to 2019.
Observational study in International journal of clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05006677 (Effectiveness and Safety of Different Antithrombotic Therapy for the Treatment of Ventricular Thrombus), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Effectiveness and Safety of Different Antithrombotic Therapy for the Treatment of Ventricular Thrombus
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors predicting resolution of left ventricular thrombus in different time windows after myocardial infarction.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- A China-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Novel Oral Anticoagulants versus Warfarin in Patients with Left Ventricular Thrombosis.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
- Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) versus vitamin K antagonist in left ventricular thrombus: An updated meta-analysis.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Time Trends of Ventricular Reconstruction and Outcomes among Patients with Left Ventricular Thrombus and Aneurysms.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulant vs. Warfarin Among Atrial Fibrillation Patients With Intermediate Stroke Risk.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted from 2010 to 2019 in National Center of Cardiovascular Diseases of China. We included patients with VT confirmed by imaging. The primary outcome was the rate of thrombus resolution. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated with or without adjustment for covariates using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: 463 patients were included. 43.0% received VKAs, 16.6% received NOACs, and 40.4% received APT. Over a median of 468 days' follow-up, NOACs group was more likely to have the thrombus resolved within 12 months' follow-up than VKAs (HR 2.28, 95% CI 1.57 to 3.31) or APT (HR 2.92, 95% CI 1.97 to 4.33). After adjustment for baseline variables, the significance remained in the comparison of NOACs versus VKAs (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.22) as well as NOACs versus APT (HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.27). No significant differences were identified in bleeding rate, thromboembolism rate, or all-cause death in 12 months' follow-up. Conclusion: Our findings showed that patients who were male, diagnosed with MI with or without ventricular aneurysm, or diagnosed with coronary artery diseases medical history had a risk of thrombus unresolved. Patients with NOACs had a higher resolution and a similar safety profile comparing VKAs or APT, which persisted after adjusting for other factors. Large randomized controlled trials are required urgently. This trial is registered with NCT05006677.
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.