Safety of Recanalization Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients on Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

1. Safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke taking direct oral anticoagulants prior to stroke: a meta-analysis.Journal of neurology · 2023
   Pooled it
2. Capsular warning syndrome and its clinical awareness and therapeutic approach: two case reports and a systematic review of the literature.Frontiers in neurology · 2023
   Pooled it
3. Deciphering the Dilemma: Anticoagulation for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF).Cureus · 2023
   Review
4. Acute Stroke Treatment in Patients Receiving Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Is it Time to Review the Guidelines?Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology
   Article

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.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as