Key result
Interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias will be evaluated for efficacy and harms in a planned Cochrane Review protocol.
Why the study?
To systematically compare the efficacy and harms of interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias.
Does interrupted anticoagulation therapy compare favorably to uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy in efficacy and harms for adults with arrhythmias undergoing catheter ablation?
Does interrupted anticoagulation therapy compare favorably to uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy in efficacy and harms for adults with arrhythmias undergoing catheter ablation?
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review to evaluate interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation during catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias.
Protocol for comparing interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation in catheter ablation; leaves open optimal periprocedural strategy.
This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:. The objective of this review is to systematically compare the efficacy and harms of interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation (CA) in adults with arrhythmias.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bawazeer et al. (2019) studied this question. Interrupted versus uninterrupted anticoagulation therapy for catheter ablation in adults with arrhythmias will be evaluated for efficacy and harms in a planned Cochrane Review protocol.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: