Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38772568›Full record

SynthesisClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis

Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Xi Chen, Linjuan Guo, Meiming Lin

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Different Anticoagulants in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Pooled it
  2. Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 4,929 Patients.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xi ChenDepartment of Cardiology, Sanming First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, SanMing, China.
Linjuan GuoDepartment of Cardiology, Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College, Nanchang, China.
Meiming LinDepartment of Cardiology, Sanming First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, SanMing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4996-1529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current guidelines recommend the standard-of-care anticoagulation (vitamin K antagonists or low-molecular-weight heparin) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Herein, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with the current standard of care in patients with CVT. We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases up to December 2023 to identify clinical trials on the effect of DOACs in patients with CVT. A Mantel-Haenszel fixed effects model was applied, and the effect measures were expressed as the absolute risk differences (RDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 4 RCTs involving 270 participants were included. In the pooled analysis, DOACs and standard of care had low incidence rates of recurrent VTE and all-cause death, and similar rates of any recanalization (78.2% vs 83.2%; RD = -4%, 95%CI:-14% to 5%) and complete recanalization (60.9% vs 69.4%; RD = -7%, 95%CI:-24% to 10%). Compared with the standard of care, DOACs had non-significant reductions in the rates of major bleeding (1.2% vs 2.4%; RD = -1%, 95%CI: -6% to 3%), intracranial hemorrhage (1.9% vs 3.6%; RD = -2%, 95%CI:-7% to 3%), clinically relevant non-major bleeding (3.8% vs 7.4%; RD = -4%, 95%CI:-9% to 2%), and any bleeding (17.3% vs 21.4%; RD = -4%, 95%CI:-16% to 8%) in patients with CVT. DOACs and standard of care showed similar efficacy and safety profiles for the treatment of CVT. DOACs might be safe and a convenient alternative to vitamin K antagonists for thromboprophylaxis in patients with CVT.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVenous ThrombosisAdministration, OralHumansIntracranial ThrombosisAnticoagulantscerebral venous thrombosisdirect oral anticoagulantsefficacymeta-analysissafety

Identifiers

PMID38772568
PMCPMC11110516

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.