ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Direct oral anticoagulants in children with giant coronary artery aneurysms from Kawasaki disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. 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.
- Coronary Artery Ectasia and Aneurysm: Benign Variant or High-Risk Substrate in Need of Tailored Treatment?Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. conventional anticoagulation in children with Kawasaki disease (KD)-associated Giant coronary artery aneurysms (GCAAs). Methods: Databases searched included PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov from conception until October 2025. Studies that (1) enrolled patients younger than 19 years with documented KD-associated GCAAs; (2) administered DOACs; (3) reported at least one efficacy/safety outcome, were included. Efficacy outcomes included thromboembolic events (coronary thrombosis, myocardial infarction, systemic thromboembolism). Safety outcomes included major or Clinically Relevant Non-Major (CRNM) bleeding. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled effects. Results: Five studies [two randomized clinical trials (RCTs), two observational studies and one prospective interventional trial] were included with a total of 594 patients [DOACs: 474 (79.8%); standard of care, SOC: 120 (20.2%)]. The overall risk ratio of thromboembolic events for patients on DOACs vs. SOC was not statistically significant [RR 0.27 (95% CI: 0.02-3.17); Conclusion: DOACs have potentially non-inferior efficacy and safety profiles compared to conventional agents, supporting the use of DOACs as a first-line anticoagulation strategy in one of childhood's most serious cardiovascular conditions. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251004094, PROSPERO CRD420251004094.
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.