Optimizing antithrombotic therapy following mitral valve repair: a comprehensive network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitral regurgitation (MR) presents either as primary or secondary, with options for surgical or transcatheter repair. Thromboembolic risks following surgery are significant despite the use of antithrombotic medications, and guidelines for postoperative anticoagulation therapy lack consistency. This systematic review aims to compare antithrombotic medications after mitral valve repair (MVR). In this study, we intend to compare antithrombotic medications after MVR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study followed the Cochrane handbook and PRISMA guidelines. We systematically searched databases (PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, Cochrane, Web of Science) until June 2024 for TMVR studies using specific criteria. Quality assessment utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Data extraction encompassed study characteristics and outcomes. Primary outcomes included thromboembolic events and bleeding within six months. Statistical analysis employed R software to assess heterogeneity and publication bias. RESULTS: From the 121 articles screened, 12 were included in the study. These cohort studies, involving 20,644 participants, spanned from 2008 to 2022. While most studies were of good to high quality, some exhibited lower quality. Analysis favored oral anticoagulants (OAC) over single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for reducing bleeding risk (RR = 0.31, 95% CI: [0.11-0.87], P < 0.05), with moderate heterogeneity. Thromboembolic events did not significantly differ among interventions. Transient ischemic attacks and stroke outcomes were similar between SAPT and vitamin K antagonists (VKA). Six-month mortality rates were comparable between SAPT and VKA, with notable heterogeneity and higher mortality with SAPT in one study. Qualitative synthesis highlighted procedural success rates and bleeding complications across different interventions in transcatheter mitral valve repair studies. CONCLUSION: OACs showed a lower risk of bleeding compared to antiplatelet therapies, while VKAs and OAC + SAPT may reduce thromboembolic events. No significant differences were found in stroke, TIA, or short-term mortality. These findings support individualized therapy and highlight the need for further randomized trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.579 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".