ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Oral anticoagulant (OAC) monotherapy vs. dual-antithrombotic therapy (DAT) in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease; a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2025. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dual-antithrombotic therapy (DAT) is recommended for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) but carries an increased risk of bleeding. Recent trials suggest oral anticoagulant (OAC) monotherapy as a safer alternative, but data remains limited. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare OAC monotherapy with DAT in this population. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared OAC monotherapy with DAT in patients with AF and stable CAD. A bivariate random-effects model was used to perform meta-analyses. Statistical analyses were conducted using R Software 4.4.1, with a significance level of Results: Four RCTs with a total of 4123 patients (20.2% females) were included. The mean age of the participants was 74 years. The results showed a significant reduction in major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (risk ratio [RR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34-0.80; Conclusions: In patients with AF and stable CAD, OAC monotherapy reduced the risk of major bleeding, with no significant differences in NACE, major ischemic events, or all-cause mortality as compared to DAT.
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.