ArticleEuropean heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology2024
Cerebral haemorrhage in the patient with atrial fibrillation: do we employ the direct oral anticoagulants without waiting too long?
Article in European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management of an inferior vena cava thrombus with comorbid intracranial haemorrhage and cerebral amyloid angiopathy.BMJ case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) is the most feared haemorrhagic complication of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT), although the risk is significantly lower with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin. Intracranial haemorrhage is generally considered, by clinicians, to be an absolute contraindication to starting or resuming OAT in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). On the other hand, the pivotal trials with DOACs excluded patients with previous ICH. Observational studies actually indicate a net clinical benefit in favour of DOAC in patients with AF and previous ICH. This benefit is confirmed by randomized clinical trials which, however, have the limitation of the small number of cases, but larger clinical trials comparing DOACs vs. aspirin or no therapy are underway. While OAT is certainly contraindicated in patients with lobar ICH and cerebral amyloid angiopathy, in other cases, the decision must be made in the individual patient through an accurate balance between thromboembolic risk and haemorrhagic risk and a multidisciplinary cardio-neurological evaluation.
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.