Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38926789›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024

Antithrombotic management after aortic valve replacement with biological prosthesis: a meta-analysis.

Mikko Uimonen, Ilari Kuitunen, Ville Ponkilainen, Ari Mennander, Mikko S Mattila

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

5 authors.

Mikko UimonenHeart Hospital, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, Elämänaukio 1, 33520, Tampere, Finland. mikko.uimonen@sydansairaala.fi.
Ilari KuitunenInstitute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Ville PonkilainenDepartment of Orthopedics, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, Tampere, Finland.
Ari MennanderHeart Hospital, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, Elämänaukio 1, 33520, Tampere, Finland.
Mikko S MattilaHeart Hospital, Tampere University Hospital, Wellbeing Services County of Pirkanmaa, Elämänaukio 1, 33520, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to summarise the existing knowledge regarding antithrombotic medications following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) using a biological valve prosthesis.

methodsWe performed a meta-analysis of studies that reported the results of using antithrombotic medication to prevent thromboembolic events after SAVR using a biological aortic valve prosthesis and recorded the outcomes 12 months after surgery. Since no randomised controlled trials were identified, observational studies were included. The analyses were conducted separately for periods of 0-12 months and 3-12 months after surgery. A random effects model was used to calculate pooled outcome event rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

resultsThe search yielded eight eligible observational studies covering 6727 patients overall. The lowest 0- to 12-month mortality was observed in patients with anticoagulation (2.0%, 95% CI 0.4-9.7%) and anticoagulation combined with antiplatelet therapy (2.2%, 95% CI 0.9-5.5%), and the highest was in patients without antithrombotic medication (7.3%, 95% CI 3.6-14.2%). Three months after surgery, mortality was lower in anticoagulant patients (0.5%, 95% CI 0.1-2.6%) than in antiplatelet patients (3.0%, 95% CI 1.2-7.4%) and those without antithrombotics (3.5%, 95% CI 1.3-9.3%). There was no eligible evidence of differences in stroke rates observed among medication strategies. At 0- to 12-month follow-up, all antithrombotic treatment regimens resulted in an increased bleeding rate (antiplatelet 4.2%, 95% CI 2.9-6.1%; anticoagulation 7.5%, 95% CI 3.8-14.4%; anticoagulation combined with antiplatelet therapy 8.3%, 95% CI 5.7-11.8%) compared to no antithrombotic medication (1.1%, 95% CI 0.4-3.4%). At 3- to 12-month follow-up, there was up to an eight-fold increase in the bleeding rate in patients with anticoagulation combined with antiplatelet therapy when compared to those with no antithrombotic medication. Overall, the evidence certainty was ranked as very low.

conclusionAlthough this meta-analysis reveals that anticoagulation therapy has a beneficial tendency in terms of mortality at 1 year after biological SAVR and suggests potential advantages in continuing anticoagulation beyond 3 months, it is limited by very low evidence certainty. The imperative for cautious interpretation and the urgent need for more robust randomised research underscore the complexity of determining optimal antithrombotic strategies in this patient population.

Indexed as

Aortic ValveFibrinolytic AgentsHeart Valve ProsthesisHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationAnticoagulantsBioprosthesisHumansPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsPostoperative ComplicationsThromboembolismAnticoagulantsFibrinolytic AgentsPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAntithrombotic medicationbioAVRBiological aortic valve replacement

Identifiers

PMID38926789
PMCPMC11202358

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.