ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
A Higher-Than-Standard-Intensity International Normalized Ratio Goal for Patients Undergoing Mechanical Aortic Valve Replacement With Additional Thrombotic Risk Factors: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 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.
- Efficacy and safety of different intensities of anticoagulation with warfarin in elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
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
backgroundLifelong anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists is recommended following mechanical aortic valve replacement (MAVR) to prevent valve thrombosis. Current guidelines recommend a standard international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.5 for patients with MAVR without additional thromboembolic risk factors, and a higher INR goal of 3.0 for those with conditions such as atrial fibrillation, prior thromboembolism, or left ventricular dysfunction. However, limited clinical evidence exists to guide anticoagulation intensity in this high-risk subgroup, necessitating a systematic review.
objectiveWe aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of higher-intensity INR goals (>3.0) compared to standard-intensity goals (approximately 2.5) in patients with MAVR with additional thromboembolic risk factors.
methodsThis protocol describes a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive literature search will be conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published before December 18, 2024. Eligible studies include randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and follow-up studies involving adult patients with MAVR on warfarin therapy, stratified by the presence of additional thromboembolic risk factors. Non-English-language studies, case reports, editorials, and animal studies will be excluded.
resultsThe review will synthesize existing data to compare the risks and benefits of intensified anticoagulation in patients with MAVR with additional thromboembolic risk factors. Data analysis and manuscript preparation are scheduled for July-August 2025.
conclusionsThis study will provide critical evidence on INR management in high-risk patients with MAVR, potentially informing future updates to clinical guidelines and optimizing the balance between thromboembolic prevention and bleeding risk. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/73389.
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.