ArticleEuropean stroke journal2022
Once versus twice daily direct oral anticoagulants in patients with recent stroke and atrial fibrillation.
Article in European stroke journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03826927 (New Oral Anticoagulants in Stroke Patients-Long Term Prevention of Recurrent Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation- a National Prospective Registry), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
New Oral Anticoagulants in Stroke Patients-Long Term Prevention of Recurrent Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation- a National Prospective Registry (NOACISP Long Term)
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Once- versus twice-daily direct oral anticoagulants after ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation - A post-hoc analysis of the ELAN trial.European stroke journal · 2026Trial
- Application of nanomaterials in central nervous system disorders.Psychopharmacology · 2025Review
- Once- versus twice-daily direct oral anticoagulants after ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation - A post-hoc analysis of the ELAN trial.European stroke journal · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban, Apixaban, and Edoxaban for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Based on Blood Coagulation Activity and Drug Plasma Concentration: SETtsu and North Osaka Multicenter Direct Oral AntiCoagulant (SET DOAC) Registry.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Update of Anticoagulation Use in Cardioembolic Stroke With a Special Reference to Endovascular Treatment.Journal of stroke · 2024Review
- Atrial Fibrillation Detected before or after Stroke: Role of Anticoagulation.Annals of neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Data on the safety and effectiveness of once-daily (QD) versus twice-daily (BID) direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in comparison to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and to one another in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and recent stroke are scarce. Patients and methods: Based on prospectively obtained data from the observational registry Novel-Oral-Anticoagulants-in-Ischemic-Stroke-Patients(NOACISP)-LONGTERM (NCT03826927) from Basel, Switzerland, we compared the occurrence of the primary outcome - the composite of recurrent ischemic stroke, major bleeding, and all-cause death - among consecutive AF patients treated with either VKA, QD DOAC, or BID DOAC following a recent stroke using Cox proportional hazards regression including adjustment for potential confounders. Results: We analyzed 956 patients (median age 80 years, 46% female), of whom 128 received VKA (13.4%), 264 QD DOAC (27.6%), and 564 BID DOAC (59%). Over a total follow-up of 1596 patient-years, both QD DOAC and BID DOAC showed a lower hazard for the composite outcome compared to VKA (adjusted HR [95% CI] 0.69 [0.48, 1.01] and 0.66 [0.47, 0.91], respectively). Upon direct comparison, the hazard for the composite outcome did not differ between patients treated with QD versus BID DOAC (adjusted HR [95% CI] 0.94 [0.70, 1.26]). Secondary analyses focusing on the individual components of the composite outcome revealed no clear differences in the risk-benefit profile of QD versus BID DOAC. Discussion and conclusion: The overall benefit of DOAC over VKA seems to apply to both QD and BID DOAC in AF patients with a recent stroke, without clear evidence that one DOAC dosing regimen is more advantageous than the other.
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.