SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Efficacy and safety of continuation vs. interruption of anticoagulation during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe appropriate periprocedural management of oral anticoagulation in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients who require long-term anticoagulation remains controversial. PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis compare the efficacy and safety of periprocedural continuation versus interruption of anticoagulation in patients undergoing TAVI with an indication for long-term anticoagulation.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases to identify relevant articles. We included both observational and randomized controlled trials. Data were analysed using random-effects model to calculate the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A p < .05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsFour studies comprising 3,144 patients, with anticoagulation continued in 1,500 (47.7%) patients were included. There were no difference between periprocedural continuation and interruption of anticoagulation in the incidence of composite outcomes (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.64-1.10; p = .19), major bleeding (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.57-1.68; p = .95), major vascular complications (OR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.72-1.20; p = .60), and myocardial infarction (MI) (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.20-1.77; p = .36). However, the incidence of stroke was significantly lower in the continuation group (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.94; p = .03). The incidence of blood transfusion was not significantly different between the continuation and interruption groups (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.42-1.77; p = .68).
conclusionsIn this meta-analysis comparing periprocedural continuation of anticoagulation to interruption of therapy in patients undergoing TAVI with concomitant indications for long-term anticoagulation, continuation of anticoagulation was associated with a lower incidence of stroke without increasing the risk of bleeding. These findings suggest a potentially favourable safety profile in favour of continuation of anticoagulant therapy, they should be interpreted with caution and validated in larger and well-designed randomised trials. The review protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number (CRD42024607149).
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.