SynthesisPloS one2026
Dual antiplatelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary drug-eluting stents: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite widespread adoption of abbreviated (<12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) strategies after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the optimal threshold for DAPT abbreviation remains undefined.
methodsWe conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating various abbreviated DAPT durations in patients undergoing PCI with contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from January 2008 through March 21, 2026. The efficacy and safety outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding, respectively. Relative treatment effects were estimated using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. Treatment ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD420261349664).
findingsTwenty-eight RCTs comprising 84,325 patients were included. Compared with 12-month DAPT, abbreviated strategies (1-, 3-, and 6-month) were not associated with a significant difference in MACE (1-month: RR 1.03 [95% CI 0.88-1.22]; 3-month: RR 0.95 [95% CI 0.82-1.10]; 6-month: RR 1.06 [95% CI 0.88-1.27]). In contrast, these shorter durations were associated with significantly reduced major bleeding (1-month: RR 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.82]; 3-month: RR 0.64 [95% CI 0.49-0.84]), with a consistent trend for 6-month DAPT (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46-1.00). SUCRA rankings indicated that the 3-month DAPT strategy ranked highest for MACE (lowest ischemic risk); whereas the 1-month strategy ranked highest for major bleeding (lowest bleeding risk), followed by the 3-month strategy.
conclusionShorter DAPT durations (1 & 3 months) were associated with reduced bleeding without evidence of increased ischemic risk compared with the conventional 12-month strategy. Among the abbreviated strategies, the 3-month regimen consistently demonstrated the most favorable overall profile across analyses, suggesting it may represent a pragmatic threshold for DAPT abbreviation. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the absence of statistically significant differences in efficacy and the limitations inherent to study-level network meta-analysis.
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.