Observational studyEuropean journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery2024
On-X aortic valve replacement patients treated with low-dose warfarin and low-dose aspirin.
Observational study in European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02677974 (On-X Aortic Prosthetic Heart Valve Low Dose Warfarin Post Approval Clinical Registry Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
On-X Aortic Prosthetic Heart Valve Low Dose Warfarin Post Approval Clinical Registry Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioprosthetic versus mechanical surgical aortic valve replacement in patients ≥65 years of age.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Article
- Major Bleeding and Thromboembolic Events with the On-X Mechanical Aortic Valve Prosthesis: A SWEDEHEART Study.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- A Higher-Than-Standard-Intensity International Normalized Ratio Goal for Patients Undergoing Mechanical Aortic Valve Replacement With Additional Thrombotic Risk Factors: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess if warfarin targeted to international normalized ratio (INR) 1.8 (range 1.5-2.0) is safe for all patients with an On-X aortic mechanical valve.
methodsThis prospective, observational registry follows patients receiving warfarin targeted at an INR of 1.8 (range 1.5-2.0) plus daily aspirin (75-100 mg) after On-X aortic valve replacement. The primary end point is a composite of thromboembolism, valve thrombosis and major bleeding. Secondary end points include the individual rates of thromboembolism, valve thrombosis and major bleeding, as well as the composite in subgroups of home or clinic-monitored INR and risk categorization for thromboembolism. The control was the patient group randomized to standard-dose warfarin (INR 2.0-3.0) plus daily aspirin 81 mg from the PROACT trial.
resultsA total of 510 patients were enroled at 23 centres in the UK, USA and Canada. Currently, the median follow-up duration is 3.4 years, and median achieved INR is 1.9. The primary composite end point rate in the low INR patients is 2.31% vs 5.39% (95% confidence interval 4.12-6.93%) per patient-year in the PROACT control group, constituting a 57% reduction. Results are consistent in subgroups of home or clinic-monitored, and high-risk patients, with reductions of 56%, 57% and 57%, respectively. Major and total bleeding are decreased by 85% and 73%, respectively, with similar rates of thromboembolic events. No valve thrombosis occurred.
conclusionsInterim results suggest that warfarin targeted at an INR of 1.8 (range 1.5-2.0) plus aspirin is safe and effective in patients with an On-X aortic mechanical valve with or without home INR monitoring.
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.