Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42467330›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2026

Precision Medicine for Anticoagulation Strategies in the Cath Lab: Part 2.

Tanawat Attachaipanich, Tania Ahuja, Samin K Sharma, Gregg W Stone, Chayakrit Krittanawong

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Tanawat AttachaipanichDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Tania AhujaDepartment of Pharmacy, NYU Langone Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Samin K SharmaCardiac Catheterization Laboratory of the Cardiovascular Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Gregg W StoneIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, NY, USA.
Chayakrit KrittanawongPenn Highlands Healthcare System, Monongahela, PA, USA. Chayakrit.Krittanawong@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewIntraprocedural anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains particularly challenging in high-risk and underrepresented populations, where the balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk is complex and often unpredictable. This review summarizes contemporary evidence and remaining knowledge gaps regarding anticoagulant selection, dosing, and monitoring in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) or end-stage renal disease, cirrhosis, nonagenarians, thrombocytopenia, chronic oral anticoagulation, mechanical circulatory support, and STEMI following fibrinolytic therapy. RECENT

findingsThese populations are frequently excluded from randomized clinical trials. In patients with STEMI following fibrinolytic therapy, optimal anticoagulation strategies remain uncertain, with evidence suggesting potential benefit of anticoagulant continuity. Mechanical circulatory support devices introduce additional complexity due to device-related thrombosis and bleeding risks, requiring dynamic, device-specific anticoagulation and monitoring strategies. Special populations such as elderly patients, cirrhosis, and CKD present unique pathophysiologic challenges, including altered pharmacokinetics and rebalanced hemostasis. Similarly, patients on chronic oral anticoagulation require individualized periprocedural strategies, as baseline therapy alone may be insufficient and supplemental intraprocedural anticoagulation is often necessary. Conventional bleeding risk scores demonstrate reduced predictive performance in these populations, highlighting important limitations in current risk stratification. Emerging evidence supports a shift toward precision-guided anticoagulation strategies that integrate actionable patient-specific factors, including renal function, platelet count, liver disease severity, and procedural complexity, along with pharmacogenomics and real-time monitoring. Advances in machine learning-based risk prediction and artificial intelligence-driven clinical decision support tools further offer the potential to enhance individualized care. However, most available evidence remains extrapolated from broader populations, and dedicated prospective studies are needed to define optimal anticoagulant selection, dosing, and monitoring strategies in these high-risk groups.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPrecision MedicineDrug MonitoringHemorrhageHumansRenal Insufficiency, ChronicRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAnticoagulantsBivalirudinHigh bleeding riskIntraprocedural anticoagulationPercutaneous coronary interventionPrecision medicineUnfractionated heparin

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.