Oral Anticoagulant Monotherapy Versus Combination Therapy in Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials
Clicks: 7
ID: 324684
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
7 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #65 of 192 articles by views in european journal of preventive cardiology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 192 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
AIMS: In patients on long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC), the optimal antithrombotic strategy in the setting of concomitant chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) remains unclear. We therefore performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing OAC monotherapy versus OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (combination therapy) in patients with CCS and any indication for long-term OAC.. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase through February 2026 to identify trials randomizing CCS patients with an indication for long-term OAC to OAC monotherapy vs. combination therapy. Net adverse clinical events (NACE) were defined as primary composite endpoint. Key secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), major bleeding, and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled using Bayesian random-effects models. RESULTS: Six (6) randomized trials met the inclusion criteria. Five (5) contributed to quantitative synthesis of primary and main secondary outcome measures (5,777 participants). OAC monotherapy significantly reduced NACE (HR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.43-0.85), major bleeding (HR 0.47, 95% CrI 0.30-0.71) and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (HR 0.47, 95% CrI 0.31-0.66) compared to combination therapy. No significant differences were observed for MACE (HR 0.83, 95% CrI 0.60-1.18), cardiovascular death (HR 0.70, 95% CrI 0.44-1.13), all-cause death, unplanned revascularisation, myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Prespecified subgroup analyses for NACE and MACE outcomes detected a signal of lower risk of MACE with direct oral anticoagulant monotherapy compared to monotherapy with vitamin K antagonists (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In CCS patients on OAC, OAC monotherapy reduces bleeding events compared to combination therapy, without clear evidence of a concomitant increase in ischemic risk.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7202164840
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Anastasios Tsarouchas, David Mutschlechner, Maximilian Tscharre, Christodoulos Papadopoulos, Thomas Gremmel |
| Journal | european journal of preventive cardiology |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/eurjpc/zwag416
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.