SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2022
Comparative efficacy and safety of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in patients with chronic coronary syndromes after percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Safety of Anticoagulant, Antiplatelet and the Combination of Both for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: How Short Is Too Short?Journal of the American Heart Association · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aimed to evaluate and compare the interactive effects of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation strategies in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Randomized controlled trials comparing different antiplatelet or anticoagulant strategies in patients with CCS after PCI were included. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), mortality, ischemic and bleeding events. Compared to aspirin alone, addition of prasugrel or ticagrelor to aspirin resulted in lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) [odds ratio (OR): 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.38-0.62); 0.810-0.84 (0.69-0.98)] and any stroke [0.56 (0.42-0.75)] at the expense of increased risk of major bleeding [1.79 (1.34-2.39); 2.08-2.38 (1.56-3.28)], whereas, clopidogrel monotherapy reduced the risk of any stroke, major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding. On subgroup analysis, compared with aspirin alone, addition of prasugrel resulted in lower MACE [0.72 (0.60-0.86)], MI [0.48 (0.38-0.62)], and stent thrombosis [0.29 (0.09-0.91)], whereas, addition of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg resulted in lower risk of MACE [0.72 (0.60-0.87)], cardiac death [0.71 (0.52-0.98)] and any stroke [0.65 (0.45-0.95)], but not reduced MI. Both prasugrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg increased major bleeding [1.79 (1.34-2.39); 1.72 (1.33-2.22)]. Clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with lower MACE [0.72 (0.58-0.90)], any stroke [0.42 (0.24-0.73)], and major bleeding [0.62 (0.40-0.96)]. Adding prasugrel or ticagrelor led to a reduced incidence of MI and prasugrel was also found to reduce the risk of MACE and stent thrombosis in CCS patients with low risk of bleeding after PCI. Clopidogrel monotherapy has advantage in reducing MACE, stroke, and major bleeding events in CCS patients at high risk of bleeding after PCI.
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.