ArticleEuropean heart journal open2025
Does the type of oral anticoagulant matter for stroke prevention or bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in European heart journal open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Cardioplegia Strategies in Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: An Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Safety in Spine Surgery: Risk Factors for Intraoperative Blood Loss and Management Strategies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Unlike in non-surgical settings, many centres continue to favour vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) following major cardiac surgery. Current guidelines indicate insufficient data on the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) early after cardiac surgery. This study aims to evaluate whether DOACs are non-inferior to VKAs in terms of efficacy and safety for stroke prevention in post-operative AF. Methods and results: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception till 2 July 2024, and relevant reviews were screened as grey literature. Studies comparing DOACs with VKAs for stroke prevention in patients with (post-operative) AF after major cardiac surgery were included. Studies on patients with mechanical valve replacement or moderate to severe mitral stenosis were excluded. Outcomes of interest included thromboembolic events, major bleeding and mortality up to 6 months after cardiac surgery. Eleven studies, including two randomized controlled trials, reporting on >18,000 patients were analyzed. There were no significant differences between DOACs and VKAs in thromboembolic events (OR: 0.96; CI: 0.62-1.50; I Conclusion: There is no high-quality evidence that DOACs and VKAs differ in efficacy or safety for stroke prevention in AF after cardiac surgery. While awaiting high-quality randomized data, our meta-analysis found no evidence to support routinely avoiding DOACs or favouring VKAs in this setting. Registration: Review registration number: CRD42023412592.
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.