SynthesisClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Different Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis. 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.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundCerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is a rare but severe type of stroke, typically treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). This study compares different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with VKAs for the management of CVT.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Central, and ScienceDirect were searched up to May 2025. A network meta-analysis using a frequentist approach was performed in RStudio version 4.3.3. P-scores were used to rank treatments. The evaluated outcomes included full recanalization, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major hemorrhage, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and mortality. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were employed to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.ResultsOur analysis included 16 studies involving 1403 patients. We found that various DOACs, including apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban, had rates of full recanalization, VTE recurrence, major hemorrhage, ICH, and mortality comparable to those of VKAs. VKAs showed the highest likelihood of full recanalization, with a P-score of 0.70, whereas apixaban had the lowest, with a P-score of 0.04. For reducing recurrent VTE rates, apixaban was the most effective (P-score = 0.83), and dabigatran the least (P-score = 0.04). Apixaban also led to the greatest reduction in ICH risk (P-score = 0.70), while rivaroxaban had the lowest likelihood (P-score = 0.29). Regarding major hemorrhage, apixaban had the highest probability of reduction (P-score = 0.81), with VKAs performing worst (P-score = 0.26). Lastly, apixaban ranked highest for reducing mortality (P-score = 0.78), whereas VKAs ranked lowest (P-score = 0.39).ConclusionDOACs showed no significant differences in rates of full recanalization, VTE recurrence, major hemorrhage, ICH, or mortality compared with VKAs. Apixaban had the highest probability of reducing VTE recurrence, mortality, and hemorrhagic events, whereas VKAs had the highest probability of achieving full recanalization.
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.