ArticleThoracic cancer2026
Perioperative Aspirin Continuation in Patients Requiring Secondary Prevention Undergoing Anatomical Lung Resection: A Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManaging perioperative aspirin for secondary prevention during lung resection balances major bleeding against catastrophic thromboembolism. Evidence guiding this scenario, especially for real-world strategies involving switches from other antiplatelets, remains limited for anatomical resections.
methodsThis retrospective study (2018-2025) included 625 patients undergoing anatomical lung resection. We compared aspirin continuation (Group 1, n = 94; chronic users or clopidogrel switchers) with no-therapy controls (Group 3, n = 468). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPW) was used to balance 16 predefined covariates. The discontinuation group (Group 2, n = 63) served as a descriptive clinical reference. Primary endpoints were major bleeding (reoperation, ≥ 4 units RBC transfusion, or death) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) within 30 days.
resultsAfter IPW adjustment, all covariates achieved satisfactory balance (SMD < 0.1). Group 1 showed a potential trend toward increased major bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 5.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-42.91; p = 0.08), but no significant difference in MACCE (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.35-6.45; p = 0.58) compared to Group 3. In adjusted linear regression, aspirin was not an independent predictor of intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.25). Notably, Group 2 (discontinuation) exhibited alarmingly high rates of MACCE (7.9%) and 90-day mortality (4.8%). Analyses for rare events were statistically underpowered.
conclusionContinuing aspirin showed a nonsignificant trend toward increased major bleeding, so its overall safety remains uncertain. However, the high event rates after stopping therapy highlight the significant risk of thromboembolism. Clinical judgment must carefully balance individual thrombotic benefits with potential bleeding 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.