An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Direct Oral Anticoagulants Against Warfarin for Left Ventricular Thrombus Resolution.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Warfarin for Left Ventricular Thrombus in Nonischemic Cardiomyopathy With Acute Kidney Injury: A Case Report and Literature Review of Anticoagulation Strategies in Renal Impairment.Cureus · 2026
   Article
2. Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Treatment of Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Review of Efficacy and Safety.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026
   Review
3. Left Ventricular Thrombus Despite Prescribed Direct Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Case Report and Review of Risk Stratification.Cureus · 2026
   Article
4. When the Apex Deceives: A Mobile Left Ventricular Mass After Myocardial Infarction.Reports (MDPI) · 2026
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as