SynthesisAmerican journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions2024
Safety and Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients with Venous Thromboembolism using Real-World Data: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have shown comparable efficacy and a superior safety profile in clinical trials for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, further study is needed to assess DOACs' effectiveness and safety compared to warfarin in a real-world context. Thus, this meta-analysis compares the effectiveness and safety of warfarin and DOACs in patients with VTE.
methodA systematic review of the literature using PubMed and EMBASE was conducted from inception until June 2024. We examined observational studies that compared safety and effectiveness between DOACs and warfarin when used in treating VTE and reported adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and/or odds ratios (ORs) for recurrent VTE, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and death from any cause. We then estimated the pooled effect using the random-effects model for meta-analysis.
resultsA total of 25 studies were included in the current meta-analysis. DOAC therapy was associated with significantly lower risks of recurrent VTE (HR 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.85), major bleeding (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72-0.83), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77-0.88), and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83) compared to warfarin. However, no statistically significant difference was observed in all-cause mortality between the two groups (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83-1.10).
conclusionThis meta-analysis found that DOACs are associated with a significant reduction in VTE recurrence in addition to the known favorable safety profile when compared to warfarin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39254826What 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.