ArticleHealth science reports2024
Direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in long-term management of cerebral venous thrombosis: A comprehensive meta-analysis.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
- Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Different Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 4,929 Patients.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Safety and Efficacy of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in the Management of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis-Where Do We Stand?Biomedicines · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We compared the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with those of warfarin in the long-term (≥6 months) treatment of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Methods: We searched electronic databases up to November 2023 to compare the use of DOACs and warfarin in CVT management. Modified Rankin scores (mRS), new intracranial hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, recurrence and nonrecanalisation events were used to assess outcome. RevMan v5.4 software and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method were utilized to analyse data. Results: A total of 25 studies involving 2301 patients were identified as having treated CVT with either DOACs or warfarin. Good long-term mRS scores 0-2 (risk ratio [RR] = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.98-1.03; Conclusion: DOACs and warfarin provide comparable long-term safety and efficacy profiles. DOACs may be preferred over warfarin due to their ease of clinical management.
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.