Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36331504›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2022

Evaluation of Direct Oral Anticoagulant Reversal Agents in Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Rahul Chaudhary, Amteshwar Singh, Rohit Chaudhary, Michael Bashline, Damon E Houghton, Alejandro Rabinstein, Jill Adamski, Richard Arndt, Narith N Ou, Maria I Rudis and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Rahul ChaudharyDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Heart and Vascular Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Amteshwar SinghDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Rohit ChaudharyDeakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael BashlineDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Heart and Vascular Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Damon E HoughtonDivision of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota.
Alejandro RabinsteinDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota.
Jill AdamskiDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Phoenix, Arizona.
Richard ArndtDepartment of Pharmacy, Mayo Clinic Health System, Eau Claire, Wisconsin.
Narith N OuDepartment of Pharmacy, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Maria I RudisDepartments of Pharmacy and Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Caitlin S BrownDepartments of Pharmacy and Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Erin D WieruszewskiDepartments of Pharmacy and Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Matthew WanekDepartment of Pharmacy, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona.
Nathan J BrinkmanDepartment of Pharmacy, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Jane A LinderbaumDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Melissa A SorensonCenter for Digital Health, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
John L AtkinsonDepartment of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Kristine M ThompsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.
Aryan N AiyerDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Heart and Vascular Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Robert D McBaneDivision of Vascular Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota.
Mayo Clinic · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · USMayo Clinic Hospital · USDeakin University · AUJacksonville College · USJohns Hopkins University · USMayo Clinic Health System · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC)-associated intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) has high morbidity and mortality. The safety and outcome data of DOAC reversal agents in ICH are limited. Objective: To evaluate the safety and outcomes of DOAC reversal agents among patients with ICH. Data Sources: PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase, EBSCO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases were searched from inception through April 29, 2022. Study Selection: The eligibility criteria were (1) adult patients (age ≥18 years) with ICH receiving treatment with a DOAC, (2) reversal of DOAC, and (3) reported safety and anticoagulation reversal outcomes. All nonhuman studies and case reports, studies evaluating patients with ischemic stroke requiring anticoagulation reversal or different dosing regimens of DOAC reversal agents, and mixed study groups with DOAC and warfarin were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Two reviewers independently selected the studies and abstracted data. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was proportion with anticoagulation reversed. The primary safety end points were all-cause mortality and thromboembolic events after the reversal agent. Results: A total of 36 studies met criteria for inclusion, with a total of 1832 patients (967 receiving 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate [4F-PCC]; 525, andexanet alfa [AA]; 340, idarucizumab). The mean age was 76 (range, 68-83) years, and 57% were men. For 4F-PCC, anticoagulation reversal was 77% (95% CI, 72%-82%; I2 = 55%); all-cause mortality, 26% (95% CI, 20%-32%; I2 = 68%), and thromboembolic events, 8% (95% CI, 5%-12%; I2 = 41%). For AA, anticoagulation reversal was 75% (95% CI, 67%-81%; I2 = 48%); all-cause mortality, 24% (95% CI, 16%-34%; I2 = 73%), and thromboembolic events, 14% (95% CI, 10%-19%; I2 = 16%). Idarucizumab for reversal of dabigatran had an anticoagulation reversal rate of 82% (95% CI, 55%-95%; I2 = 41%), all-cause mortality, 11% (95% CI, 8%-15%, I2 = 0%), and thromboembolic events, 5% (95% CI, 3%-8%; I2 = 0%). A direct retrospective comparison of 4F-PCC and AA showed no differences in anticoagulation reversal, proportional mortality, or thromboembolic events. Conclusions and Relevance: In the absence of randomized clinical comparison trials, the overall anticoagulation reversal, mortality, and thromboembolic event rates in this systematic review and meta-analysis appeared similar among available DOAC reversal agents for managing ICH. Cost, institutional formulary status, and availability may restrict reversal agent choice, particularly in small community hospitals.

Indexed as

HemorrhageThromboembolismAdolescentAdultAgedAnticoagulant Reversal AgentsAnticoagulantsAnticoagulation ReversalFemaleHumansIntracranial HemorrhagesMaleRetrospective StudiesAnticoagulant Reversal AgentsAnticoagulants

Identifiers

PMID36331504
PMCPMC9636520
OpenAlexW4308326735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.