SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for secondary prevention of stroke and other thromboembolic events in people with antiphospholipid syndrome.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents for secondary prevention of stroke and other thromboembolic events in people with antiphospholipid syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Mechanisms sensitive to different drugs mediate a proadhesive and pro-thrombotic platelet phenotype in antiphospholipid syndrome.Haematologica · 2026Article
- Acute myocardial infarction and antiphospholipid syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- A disrupted adenosinergic axis facilitates platelet activation in APS: exploring a novel therapeutic target.Blood advances · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Risk Factors of Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Retrospective Monocenter Analysis.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Cyclin D1/CDK coordination with the cellular prion protein upregulated cell proliferation signaling and preserved neurological function in acute IS rats.International journal of biological sciences · 2025Article
- Neurovascular complications of antiphospholipid syndrome: a narrative review.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2024Review
- Diagnosis and management of antiphospholipid syndrome.Australian prescriber · 2024Review
- The well-defined antiphospholipid syndrome induced by COVID-19: a rare case report and review of the literature.Thrombosis journal · 2024Review
- Deciphering Mechanisms, Prevention Strategies, Management Plans, Medications, and Research Techniques for Strokes in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Elucidating the Neuropsychiatric Phenomena of Antiphospholipid Syndrome in a 31-Year-Old Female.Cureus · 2024Article
- Innovations in Breaking Barriers: Liposomes as Near-Perfect Drug Carriers in Ischemic Stroke Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2024Review
- Bleeding events in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome: prevalence, severity, and associated damage accrual.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Should bleeding be a concern in antiphospholipid syndrome?Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Development of a risk prediction model for the first occurrence of thrombosis in patients with OAPS.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Lack of efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in antiphospholipid antibody syndrome.Haematologica · 2022Article
- Neurologic Manifestations of Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022Review
- High Levels of Thromboxane (TX) Are Associated with the Sex-Dependent Non-Dipping Phenomenon in Ischemic Stroke Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Clinical Management of Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Sex Differences in Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis in Primary Thrombotic Antiphospholipid Syndrome.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAntiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by arterial or venous thrombosis (or both), and/or pregnancy morbidity in association with the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies. The prevalence of APS is estimated at 40 to 50 cases per 100,000 people. The most common sites of thrombosis are cerebral arteries and deep veins of the lower limbs. People with a definite APS diagnosis have an increased lifetime risk of recurrent thrombotic events.
objectivesTo assess the effects of antiplatelet (AP) or anticoagulant agents, or both, for the secondary prevention of recurrent thrombosis, particularly ischemic stroke, in people with APS. SEARCH
methodsWe last searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, and ongoing trials registers on 22 November 2019. We checked reference lists of included studies, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines. We also contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any anticoagulant or AP agent, or both, in the secondary prevention of thrombosis in people with APS, according to the criteria valid when the study took place. We did not include studies specifically addressing women with obstetrical APS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently worked on each step of the review, following Cochrane methods. We summarized the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsWe identified eight studies including 811 participants that compared different AP or anticoagulant agents. NOAC (non-VKA oral anticoagulant: rivaroxaban 15 or 20 mg/d) versus standard-dose VKA (vitamin K antagonist: warfarin at moderate International Normalized Ratio [INR] - 2.5) or adjusted [INR 2.0-3.0] dose): In three studies there were no differences in any thromboembolic event (including death) and major bleeding (moderate-certainty evidence), but an increased risk of stroke (risk ratio [RR] 14.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.87 to 106.8; moderate-certainty evidence). One of the studies reported a small benefit of rivaroxaban in terms of quality of life at 180 days measured as health state on Visual Analogue Scale (mean difference [MD] 7 mm, 95% CI 2.01 to 11.99; low-certainty evidence), but not measured as health utility on a scale from 0 to 1 (MD 0.04, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.10; low-certainty evidence). High-dose VKA (warfarin with a target INR of 3.1 to 4.0 [mean 3.3] or 3.5 [mean 3.2]) versus standard-dose VKA (warfarin with a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0 [mean 2.3] or 2.5 [mean 2.5]): In two studies there were no differences in the rates of thrombotic events and major bleeding (RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.79 to 6.23, low-certainty evidence), but an increased risk of minor bleeding in one study during a mean of 3.4 years (standard deviation [SD] 1.2) of follow-up (RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.07 to 6.07). In both trials there was evidence of a higher risk of any bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] 2.03 95% CI 1.12 to 3.68; low-certainty evidence) in the high-dose VKA group, and for this outcome (any bleeding) the incidence is not different, only the time to event is showing an effect. Standard-dose VKA plus a single AP agent (warfarin at a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0 plus aspirin 100 mg/d) versus standard-dose VKA (warfarin at a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0): One high-risk-of-bias study showed an increased risk of any thromboembolic event with combined treatment (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 4.43; low-certainty evidence) and reported on major bleeding with five cases in the combined treatment group and one case in the standard-dose VKA treatment group, resulting in RR 7.42 (95% CI 0.91 to 60.7; low-certainty evidence) and no differences for secondary outcomes (very low- to low-certainty evidence). Single/dual AP agent and standard-dose VKA (pooled results): Two high-risk-of-bias studies compared a combination of AP and VKA (aspirin 100 mg/d plus warfarin or unspecified VKA at a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0 or 2.0 to 2.5) with a single AP agent (aspirin 100 mg/d), but did not provide any conclusive evidence regarding the effects of those drugs in people with APS (very low-certainty evidence). One of the above-mentioned studies was a three-armed study that compared a combination of AP and VKA (aspirin 100 mg/d plus warfarin at a target INR of 2.0 to 2.5) with dual AP therapy (aspirin 100 mg/d plus cilostazol 200 mg/d) and dual AP therapy (aspirin 100 mg/d plus cilostazol 200 mg/d) versus a single AP treatment (aspirin 100 mg/d). This study reported on stroke (very low-certainty evidence) but did not report on any thromboembolic events, major bleeding, or any secondary outcomes. We identified two ongoing studies and three studies are awaiting classification. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe evidence identified indicates that NOACs compared with standard-dose VKAs may increase the risk of stroke and do not appear to alter the risk of other outcomes (moderate-certainty evidence). Using high-dose VKA versus standard-dose VKA did not alter the risk of any thromboembolic event or major bleeding but may increase the risk of any form of bleeding (low-certainty evidence). Standard-dose VKA combined with an AP agent compared with standard-dose VKA alone may increase the risk of any thromboembolic event and does not appear to alter the risk of major bleeding or other outcomes (low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the benefit or harm of using standard-dose VKA plus AP agents versus single or dual AP therapy, or dual versus single AP therapy, for the secondary prevention of recurrent thrombosis in people with APS (very low-certainty evidence).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.