ReviewCureus2025
Balancing Bleeding and Ischemic Risks: A Systematic Review of Dual Versus Triple Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.
Review in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates the comparative efficacy and safety of dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A comprehensive literature search identified four randomized controlled trials encompassing diverse populations and treatment strategies. Dual therapy, consisting of a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant combined with a single P2Y12 inhibitor, consistently demonstrated a reduction in bleeding complications compared to conventional triple therapy without compromising protection against ischemic events such as myocardial infarction, stroke, or stent thrombosis. While the larger multicenter trials provided robust evidence supporting the safety of early aspirin withdrawal, smaller trials were limited by sample size and early termination, restricting the generalizability of their findings. Nevertheless, the overall evidence suggests that dual therapy should be considered the preferred approach for most patients, with triple therapy reserved for carefully selected individuals at high ischemic risk where a short course may provide incremental benefit. These findings support the growing shift in clinical practice toward individualized antithrombotic strategies that optimize both safety and efficacy in this complex patient 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.