ArticleActa Cardiologica Sinica2022
Dual versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy in Medically Treated Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients with Baseline Thrombocytopenia - Insights from a Multi-Institute Cohort Study.
Article in Acta Cardiologica Sinica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The safety and efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in medically treated acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with baseline thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 150 × 10 Methods: In this multi-institute retrospective cohort study, we included 468 patients with medically treated AMI with baseline thrombocytopenia and separated them into single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) and DAPT groups according to the discharge anti-thrombotic strategy. The primary outcome was net clinical adverse events (NACEs), defined as a composite of death, ischemic events (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and transient ischemic attack), and major bleeding within 30 days. Results: There were 168 patients in the SAPT group (100 taking aspirin and 68 taking clopidogrel) and 300 in the DAPT group. A primary outcome occurred in 35 (24.11 per 100 patient-months) patients in the SAPT group and 39 (14.26 per 100 patient-months) patients in the DAPT group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40-1.10; p = 0.1145]. Kaplan-Meier curves showed favorable results in the DAPT group (log-rank p = 0.0243). Bleeding events occurred in 18 (10.71 per 100 patient-months) patients in the SAPT group and 18 (6.40 per 100 patient-months) patients in the DAPT group (adjusted HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.32-1.36; p = 0.2573). Conclusions: DAPT versus SAPT as discharge anti-thrombotic strategy in thrombocytopenic patients with medically treated AMI did not significantly improve NACEs at 30 days. However, there was a trend towards favorable outcomes in the DAPT group. These results should be interpreted carefully with respect to the relatively limited trial population and study design.
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.