ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2025
3-Factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the reversal of oral factor Xa inhibitors.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reversal of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) for Critical Bleeding or Urgent Procedures.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple agents exist for the reversal of oral Factor Xa inhibitor (FXa) associated bleeding, including Coagulation FXa Recombinant, Inactivated zhzo (andexanet alfa) and 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). While classified as a 3F-PCC product, Profilnine contains up to 35 IU of Factor VII (per 100 IU of Factor IX) in addition to therapeutic levels of Factors II, IX, and X, and has demonstrated a similar impact on prothrombin time and blood product usage in non-warfarin related bleeding. This was a retrospective, multicenter study at four medical centers of adult patients who presented with major bleeding associated with oral FXa inhibitors and received either 4F-PCC (n = 64) or 3F-PCC (n = 61). The primary outcome was hemostatic effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of thromboembolism, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay. The most common indication for reversal was intracranial bleeding. For the primary outcome, 84% of all patients were rated as effective with no difference noted between the groups (p = 0.81). No significant difference between groups was found in the multivariable analysis adjusting for baseline differences between groups including race, total body weight, type of bleeding, and the use of antiplatelet therapy. There was no difference in the length of stay, in-hospital mortality, or the incidence of thromboembolism between the groups. Overall, no significant differences were found in the effectiveness or safety of 4F-PCC and 3F-PCC use in the management of oral FXa inhibitor-associated bleeding. Further investigations are warranted to explore the use of 3F-PCC for this indication and its safety and effectiveness.
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.