ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2026
Clopidogrel vs. aspirin in addition to oral anticoagulation as part of double antithrombotic therapy following PCI: a post-hoc analysis of the PERSEO registry.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2026. 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.
- Clopidogrel vs. Aspirin in Double Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients on Oral Anticoagulation Undergoing Coronary Stenting.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), clopidogrel is currently the preferred antiplatelet agent to be given in double antithrombotic therapy (DAT). To explore whether aspirin could be an alternative option, a post-hoc analysis of the Italian, multi-center, prospective PERSEO (PERcutaneouS coronary intErventions in patients treated with Oral anticoagulant therapy) registry was performed. Out of the 989 patients included in the analysis, 769 (78%) received clopidogrel and 220 (22%) aspirin. Baseline characteristics were largely comparable between the two groups, particularly as regards the indications for PCI and OAC, with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation respectively, being the most common, the number of stents implanted, and the use of direct oral anticoagulants and proton-pump inhibitors. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months, the primary outcome of net adverse cardiac events (NACE), including major adverse cardiac/cerebral events (MACCE) and major and clinically relevant bleeding was similar with clopidogrel-based and aspirin-based DAT (16.3% vs. 14.6%; p = 0.541). Secondary outcomes of MACCE, all-cause death, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attack, target vessel revascularization, and major and clinically relevant bleeding were also comparable. Multivariable analyses confirmed no association between type of DAT and outcomes. Survival analyses showed overlapping event rates between clopidogrel-based and aspirin-based DAT. In patients on OAC undergoing PCI, no significant difference in the occurrence of NACE was observed between clopidogrel-based and aspirin-based DAT. While waiting for further randomized data, individualized physician’s choice may be considered on an individual basis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42008084What 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.