SynthesisArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2024
Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.
Synthesis in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Advancing the Use of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Left Ventricular Thrombus Management.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are the recommended first-line treatment for left ventricular thrombus (LVT); however, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been considered an alternative therapy.
objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs compared with VKAs therapy in patients with LVT.
methodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were systematically searched for randomized clinical trials or cohort studies that compared DOACs versus VKAs for LVT. Risk ratios (RRs) were computed for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Statistical significance was defined as p value < 0.05.
resultsA total of 4 randomized clinical trials and 29 cohort studies were included, with 4,450 patients assigned to either DOACs or VKAs. There was no significant difference between groups for stroke or systemic embolic (SSE) events (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.07; p = 0.157), stroke (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.11; p = 0.140), systemic embolic (SE) events (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.40 to 1.17; p = 0.166), thrombus resolution (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11; p = 0.077), any bleeding (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.00; p = 0.054), clinically relevant bleeding (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.03; p = 0.066), minor bleeding (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.43 to 1.23; p = 0.234), major bleeding (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.80; p = 0.705), and all-cause mortality (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.79 to 1.39; p = 0.752). Compared with VKAs, rivaroxaban significantly reduced SSE events (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.91; p = 0.029) and SE events (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.95; p = 0.037).
conclusionsDOACs had a similar rate of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events, as well as thrombus resolution, compared to VKAs in the treatment of LVTs. Rivaroxaban therapy had a significant reduction in thromboembolic events, compared to VKAs.
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.