ReviewPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Meta-Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus.
Review in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- DOACs vs Warfarin for Post-myocardial Infarction Left Ventricular Thrombus: A GRADE-assessed Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Trials.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Methamphetamine-Associated Cardiomyopathy and Cardioembolic Stroke: Brain-Heart-Gut Axis Crosstalk, Diagnostic Strategies, and Anticoagulation Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Over-the-Wire Retrieval of Infectious Hemodialysis Catheter-Related Right Atrial Thrombus Causing Recurrent Pleural Empyema and Sepsis: A Case-Based Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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
backgroundLiterature on the preferred anticoagulant for treating left ventricular thrombus (LVT) is lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare the efficacy of DOACs versus warfarin in treating LVT.
methodsDatabases were searched for RCTs and adjusted observational studies that compared DOAC versus warfarin through March 2024. The primary efficacy outcomes of interest were LVT resolution, systemic embolism, composite of stroke, and TIA. The primary safety outcomes encompassed all-cause mortality and bleeding events.
resultsOur meta-analysis including 31 studies demonstrated that DOAC use was associated with higher odds of thrombus resolution (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.86-1.31,
conclusionCompared to VKAs, DOACs are noninferior as the anticoagulant of choice for LVT treatment. However, further studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
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.