ReviewCureus2025
Postoperative Anticoagulation After Mitral Bioprosthetic Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin.
Review in Cureus, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal anticoagulation strategy following mitral bioprosthetic valve replacement (BPVR) remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to warfarin in this context. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and other databases for studies published between 2015 and 2025, comparing NOACs to warfarin in adults with mitral bioprostheses. Eligible studies reported thromboembolic and/or bleeding outcomes, with a minimum of six months' follow-up. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic, and publication bias was assessed via funnel plot and Egger's test. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 1,506 patients (709 on NOACs and 797 on warfarin). Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohorts. NOACs studied were apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran. Three studies were included in the quantitative synthesis for each primary outcome. For stroke/systemic embolism, the pooled OR for NOACs was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.02-16.87, p = 0.55; I² = 33.7%). For major bleeding, the pooled OR was 1.06 (95% CI: 0.12-9.47, p = 0.94; I² = 74.9%). No significant publication bias was detected. Qualitative findings suggested NOACs had similar or lower rates of stroke, major and minor bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Valve thrombosis and rehospitalization were infrequently reported and comparable. NOACs appear to be a safe and effective alternative to warfarin after mitral BPVR. However, current evidence is limited by heterogeneity and wide CIs. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.
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.