2021
DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(21)01461-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Antithrombotic Management of Atrial Fibrillation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Over 10 Years: Evolution and Guidelines Uptake

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this context, large-scale observational clinical studies are strongly awaited to confirm in a 'realworld' setting what is recommended in the guidelines. Currently, all published prospective studies on this topic [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] enrolled a small number of patients that limits the possibility of reliable analyses on hard clinical end points.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this context, large-scale observational clinical studies are strongly awaited to confirm in a 'realworld' setting what is recommended in the guidelines. Currently, all published prospective studies on this topic [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] enrolled a small number of patients that limits the possibility of reliable analyses on hard clinical end points.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this context, large-scale observational clinical studies are strongly awaited to confirm in a ‘real-world’ setting what is recommended in the guidelines. Currently, all published prospective studies on this topic 13–22 enrolled a small number of patients that limits the possibility of reliable analyses on hard clinical end points. Only recently, a large prospective study 23 enrolling more than 1000 patients has been published showing a significant reduction in clinically relevant bleeding with DAT compared with TAT but a trend towards a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (12.4 versus 9.6%, P = 0.17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%