ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Anticoagulation Strategies for Left Ventricular Thrombus After Myocardial Infarction: A Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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.
- Research Advances in Timing of Anticoagulant Therapy Following Cardioembolic Stroke.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) remains a clinically significant complication following acute myocardial infarction (MI). Although its incidence has declined in the era of primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), the best treatment remains unclear. For decades, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin have been the mainstay of therapy, supported by guidelines recommendations. However, the limitations of warfarin, including a narrow therapeutic range, the need for frequent monitoring, and food/drug interactions, have spurred interest in direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). This review summarizes the available evidence on anticoagulation strategies for LVT after MI, focusing on observational studies and recent randomized controlled trials. A total of 12 studies were included in this review: 9 retrospective cohorts and 3 randomized controlled trials. Patient populations ranged from small single-center cohorts to large multicenter registries. DOACs, compared with warfarin, were associated with a higher rate of thrombus resolution, a lower rate of stroke and systemic embolism, and a similar mortality. The usage of DOACs marginally reduced the rate of major bleeding compared with warfarin. The current evidence indicates that DOACs may offer comparable efficacy and potentially improved safety relative to warfarin, although most randomized trials remain small and underpowered for definitive conclusions. Larger, adequately powered studies are still required before DOACs can be routinely considered equivalent alternatives. The RIVAWAR randomized trial provides the strongest evidence to date regarding the use of DOACs in LVT after MI, but further large-scale randomized studies are required to establish definitive guidance. Until then, anticoagulation therapy including DOACs should be individualized, balancing the thromboembolic risk, bleeding risk, and practical considerations of anticoagulant use.
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.