MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 6048: An Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Factor Xa Inhibitors with Thrombin Inhibitors nn Preventing Venous Thromboembolism after Hip or Knee Surgery

2008· article· en· W65525066 on OpenAlexaff
Ganesan Karthikeyan, John W. Eikelboom, Salim Yusuf, Jack Hirsh

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRivaroxabanDabigatranFondaparinuxXimelagatranDiscovery and development of direct thrombin inhibitorsDirect thrombin inhibitorRandomized controlled trialWarfarinClinical trialAnesthesiaSurgeryVenous thromboembolismInternal medicineThrombinThrombosisAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Selective factor Xa inhibitors and thrombin inhibitors are effective in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hip or knee surgery, but they have not been compared directly against each other. We performed an indirect comparison of the relative efficacy and safety of these two classes of inhibitors, from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these agents, in which a low molecular heparin (LMWH) was used as a common comparator. Methods Relevant RCTs were identified by searching MEDLINE (Ovid MEDLINE® 1950 to March week 1, 2008), EMBASE (1980 to 2008, week 10) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1 st quarter 2008), supplemented by hand searching and screening meeting websites. We restricted our search to the five agents (ximelagatran, dabigatran, fondaparinux, idraparinux and rivaroxaban) that have been evaluated in phase III trials. Trials were included if the study drug was compared against a LMWH and was administered in the pre- and/or postoperative (12–24hrs from surgery) period, to patients undergoing elective, hip or knee replacement surgery. The outcomes assessed were total VTE, symptomatic VTE, major bleeding and the need for blood transfusions. We obtained summary estimates (RR and 95% CI) for each outcome for the Xa and thrombin inhibitor studies, using a random-effects model. We then performed indirect comparisons between these estimates using standard statistical methods. Results We included 12 trials (18110 patients) of factor Xa inhibitors (fondaparinux, rivaroxaban) and 10 trials (17777 patients) of thrombin inhibitors (ximelagatran, dabigatran). These agents were compared with enoxaparin, except in two studies where dalteparin was the control agent. On indirect comparison, factor Xa inhibitors were significantly better than thrombin inhibitors in preventing total VTE (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 – 0.75) and symptomatic VTE (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25– 0.97). There was no difference in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.71–1.93) or the number of transfusions (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94–1.11). Conclusion Based on this indirect comparison, selective factor Xa inhibitors appear to be more effective than thrombin inhibitors, for the prevention of VTE after elective hip or knee surgery.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.047
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.122
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0470.122
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.034
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→