Observational studyInternal and emergency medicine2024
Patients with atrial fibrillation and common exclusion criteria from clinical trials are at high risk of clinical events: the Murcia AF Project II (MAFP-II) cohort study.
Observational study in Internal and emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
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.
- Edoxaban for atrial fibrillation in patients with atherosclerotic disease in daily clinical practice.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Trial
- The BNP-to-Albumin Ratio (BAR) as a Predictor of All-Cause Mortality in Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Atrial fibrillation: from pathogenesis to novel treatment options.Molecular biomedicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSome clinical characteristics and comorbidities in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients are exclusion criteria in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating oral anticoagulants (OAC). However, these conditions are present also in everyday clinical practice patients. We compared the risk of adverse clinical outcomes between patients with and without RCT exclusion criteria.
methodsThe Murcia AF Project II was an observational cohort study including AF outpatients starting vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) from July 2016 to June 2018. For the selection of the exclusion criteria, the four pivotal RCTs of direct-acting OAC (DOACs) were used as reference. During 2 years, all ischemic strokes/transient ischemic attacks, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), major bleeds, and all-cause deaths were recorded.
results1050 patients (51.5% female, median age 77 years) were included, of whom 368 (35%) met at least one exclusion criterion for RCTs. During follow-up, the incidence rate ratios for major bleeding, MACE and all-cause mortality were higher among patients with exclusion criteria (all p < 0.001). Patients fulfilling at least one exclusion criterion had increased risks of major bleeding (aHR 1.48; 95% CI 1.22-1.81; p < 0.001), MACE (aHR 1.51, 95% CI 1.10-2.09, p = 0.012), and mortality (aHR 3.22, 95% CI 2.32-4.48, p < 0.001), as well as a lower event-free survival (all log-rank p < 0.001).
conclusionsIn this AF cohort taking VKAs, more than one-third had at least one RCT exclusion criteria, which translates into higher risk of major bleeding, MACE, and death. These observations should be considered when translating RCTs results to AF patients for a proper and a more patient-centered 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.