ReviewThrombosis journal2025
Balancing the risks: continuous vs. interrupted anticoagulation during TAVI - what does the evidence say?
Review in Thrombosis journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Continuous vs interrupted direct oral anticoagulants for minimal bleeding-risk surgical procedures-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Pooled it
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
Anticoagulation therapy is a critical component of post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) management, aimed at reducing the risk of thromboembolic events and mortality. This review examines the efficacy of continuous versus interrupted anticoagulation strategies in TAVI patients, focusing on mortality, stroke rates, and composite events. A literature review was conducted, analyzing recent studies that evaluate the impact of different anticoagulation regimens on clinical outcomes in TAVI patients. Key outcomes assessed include all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events, and major cardiovascular complications within 30 days and up to one year post-procedure. The review identifies a trend favoring continuous anticoagulation, particularly with direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), which was associated with lower mortality rates and reduced stroke incidence in high-risk patients. However, findings were inconsistent across studies, with some reporting no significant differences in outcomes between continuous and interrupted strategies. Additionally, the review highlights the need to balance the benefits of thromboembolic prevention with the increased risk of bleeding and vascular complications associated with continuous therapy. The findings show the importance of individualized anticoagulation strategies tailored to patient risk profiles. Clinicians should weigh the potential benefits of continuous anticoagulation against the risks, particularly in high-risk populations. Ongoing research is essential to refine anticoagulation protocols in TAVI patients, enhancing both safety and efficacy in clinical practice.
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.