ArticleBlood advances2026
Bleeding and thrombotic outcomes with oral anticoagulants in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and venous thromboembolism.
Article in Blood advances, 2026. 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.
- Real-world data in the absence of RCTs: the case for DOACs.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Perioperative management of colorectal surgical patients receiving a direct oral anticoagulant: a scoping review, particular emphasis on procedure-specific risks, and pharmacogenomics.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractPatients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding. We aimed to compare the risk of recurrent VTE and bleeding between direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in patients with IBD and VTE. The study included adults with IBD and VTE who were newly prescribed DOACs or warfarin. The primary study outcomes were recurrent VTE and a composite of serious bleeding. We used Cox proportional hazard model after propensity score matching to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In a secondary analysis, we compared the risk of bleeding in patients on DOACs with IBD vs patients without IBD. Our matched IBD cohort of patients initiating oral anticoagulants comprised 2174 patients (1087 DOAC users and 1087 warfarin users). After propensity score matching, DOAC use (compared with warfarin) was associated with a lower risk of bleeding (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.85) with no difference in the risk of recurrent VTE (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.59-1.15). In the secondary analysis of patients with VTE who received DOACs, there was a twofold increase in the risk of bleeding in patients with IBD compared with those without IBD (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.64-2.41). In patients with IBD and VTE, DOAC use was associated with a lower risk of bleeding compared with warfarin, without a significant difference in the risk of recurrent VTE. However, even with the use of DOACs, patients with IBD were twice as likely to experience serious bleeding as those without IBD, highlighting the importance of close monitoring.
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.