ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Low or Reduced Dose Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Left Atrial Appendage Closure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Antithrombotic strategies and DOAC dosing following left atrial appendage occlusion: a network meta-analysis.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2026Pooled it
- Massive Device-Related Thrombus After Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Kidney Transplant Recipient With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of low-dose direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, up to August 12, 2024. Studies comparing low-dose DOACs with DAPT in post-LAAC patients were included. The primary outcomes of interest were thromboembolic events, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Four studies, including two randomized controlled trials and two observational studies, met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 828 patients (319 in the DOAC group and 509 in the DAPT group). The meta-analysis revealed that patients treated with DOACs had a significantly lower risk of thromboembolic events compared to those receiving DAPT. DOACs were also associated with a significantly reduced risk of device-related thrombosis. Although the risk of stroke was lower in the DOAC group, the difference was not statistically significant. The risk of death did not differ significantly between the two groups. Regarding safety outcomes, patients receiving DOACs experienced fewer bleeding events compared to those on DAPT, with the difference being statistically significant. However, high heterogeneity was reported among the study results for bleeding events. These findings suggest that low-dose DOACs may be a more effective and safer alternative to DAPT for post-LAAC antithrombotic management, particularly in patients at high risk for both thromboembolic and bleeding events. DOACs demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing the risk of stroke, systemic embolism, and other thrombotic complications, while also minimizing bleeding risks.
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.