SynthesisClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
DOACs vs Warfarin for Post-myocardial Infarction Left Ventricular Thrombus: A GRADE-assessed Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Trials.
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. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and PurposeCurrent AHA and ACC guidelines warrant studies comparing direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and warfarin for post-myocardial infarction (MI) left ventricular thrombus (LVT). DOAC is increasingly considered due to its minimal monitoring requirement. However, DOAC efficacy in LVT resolution remains uncertain. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOAC versus warfarin in post-MI LVT.MethodsWe searched Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Library databases from inception up to August 2025. The primary outcome was LVT resolution. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, stroke, and major bleeding rates.ResultsFour RCTs encompassing 396 patients (240 DOAC, 156 warfarin) were included. LVT resolution occurred in 90.0% of DOAC patients versus 86.5% in warfarin patients, with no significant difference (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.06, p=0.84). Subgroup analysis revealed comparable outcomes for both rivaroxaban and apixaban versus warfarin. Stroke rates were higher in DOAC compared to warfarin but not statically significant between groups (2.5% vs 1.2%, RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.15-12.95). Similarly, all-cause mortality (3.3% vs 1.9%) and major bleeding (1.6% vs 1.9%) showed no significant differences.ConclusionDOACs demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety to warfarin for post-MI LVT management, with similar rates of thrombus resolution and complications. However, TSA indicates that current evidence is underpowered, and further large-scale randomized trials are required to confirm these findings.
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.