SynthesisEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2026
The bleeding costs of intensive vs. less intensive antithrombotic strategies: a meta-regression analysis.
Synthesis in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAntithrombotic therapy is a cornerstone of secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The main drawback of antithrombotic therapy is the associated bleeding risk. The correlation between the magnitude of antithrombotic efficacy and the severity of bleeding risk remains unclear, rendering the comparative evaluation of antithrombotic regimens based on their therapeutic advantages and risks challenging. This study aims to establish a benchmark for evaluating the trade-off between ASCVD prevention and bleeding risk through a systematic analysis of extant trial data. METHODS AND
resultsMeta-regression analysis. We searched PubMed and Embase and extracted trials comparing antithrombotic treatments in patients with established ASCVD. We extracted data on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) reduction and bleeding events. A weighted generalized additive regression was used for data analysis. Our analysis included 50 studies, comprising a total of 357 711 patients with coronary artery disease (63%), cerebrovascular events (28%), and peripheral arterial disease (15%). Overall, ASCVD event reduction by intensification of antithrombotic therapy correlates with an increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Also, the reduction in the composite of acute coronary syndrome and stroke is associated with an increased risk of fatal haemorrhage. When regimens not routinely used in current practice are excluded, the increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage with intensified antithrombotic treatment is attenuated to non-significant, but ASCVD event reduction still correlates with an increased risk in fatal haemorrhage. The analyses and figures we present can serve as a benchmark to compare results of future trials on antithrombotic regimens for ASCVD to other (contemporary) regimens.
conclusionWith currently used antithrombotic regimens, ASCVD event reduction by more intensive treatment no longer increases risk of intracranial bleeding. Fatal haemorrhage remains a seemingly inevitable cost of ASCVD reduction by antithrombotic treatment intensification, albeit at low absolute risks.
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.