ReviewCureus2024
Unraveling the Paradox: Can Anticoagulation Improve Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Increased Bleeding Risk?
Review in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Management of gastrointestinal bleed in the intensive care setting, an updated literature review.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) patients frequently present with comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation (AF) or other cardiovascular conditions, elevating their risk of thromboembolic events. Consequently, anticoagulation therapy is often considered for thromboprophylaxis, although its initiation in HF patients is complicated by concomitant bleeding risk factors. This review explores the paradoxical relationship between HF, increased bleeding risk, and the potential benefits of anticoagulation. Through an examination of existing evidence from clinical trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses, we aim to elucidate the role of anticoagulation in HF patients with increased bleeding risk. Despite guidelines recommending anticoagulation for certain HF patients with AF or other thromboembolic risk factors, uncertainty persists regarding the optimal management strategy for those at heightened risk of bleeding. The review discusses the pathophysiological mechanisms linking HF and thrombosis, challenges in bleeding risk assessment, and strategies to minimize bleeding risk while optimizing thromboprophylaxis. Shared decision-making between clinicians and patients is emphasized as essential for individualized treatment plans that balance the potential benefits of anticoagulation against the risk of bleeding complications. Furthermore, it examines emerging anticoagulant agents and their potential role in HF management, highlighting the need for further research to delineate optimal management strategies and inform evidence-based practice. In conclusion, while anticoagulation holds promise for improving outcomes in HF patients, careful consideration of patient-specific factors and ongoing research efforts are essential to optimize therapeutic strategies in this population.
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.