Oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention amongst atrial fibrillation patients with valvular heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The majority of evidence on the safety and efficacy of oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention amongst patients with atrial fibrillation is derived from those without significant valvular heart disease. This article will review current knowledge, areas of uncertainty and controversy, and ongoing research on oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention amongst patients with valvular heart disease. RECENT FINDINGS: The rates of stroke, systemic embolism, and major bleeding were similar for patients with and without significant native valvular disease when treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or vitamin K antagonists. There are very limited prospective data on the safety and efficacy of DOAC use for patients with bioprosthetic valves or rheumatic mitral stenosis. SUMMARY: Atrial fibrillation patients with concomitant valvulopathies constitute a group with high thromboembolic risk and should be treated with oral anticoagulation. There is good supportive evidence that DOAC is well tolerated and effective in preventing thromboembolism amongst patients with native valvular disease. Further research is underway to better define the risks and benefits of DOAC use among patients with bioprosthetic valves or rheumatic mitral stenosis in preventing thromboembolic events. Until then, vitamin K antagonists remain the oral anticoagulant of choice for these patient subsets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".