Factor Xa inhibitors vs Anticoagulants: Minor bleeding
Factor Xa inhibitors showed no clear difference in minor bleeding at 30 days compared with anticoagulants (high certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Factor Xa inhibitors vs Anticoagulants Minor bleeding at 30 days · Anticoagulants in ACS Factor Xa inhibitors showed no clear difference in minor bleeding at 30 days compared with anticoagulants (high certainty). Factor Xa inhibitors for acute coronary syndromes (2011) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.7 [0.14, 3.39] | 2 studies · 20404 participants | High |
Factor Xa inhibitors vs Anticoagulants Minor bleeding at 30 days ‐ UFH · Anticoagulants in ACS Factor Xa inhibitors showed no clear difference in minor bleeding at 30 days ‐ UFH compared with anticoagulants (moderate certainty). Factor Xa inhibitors for acute coronary syndromes (2011) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.76 [0.52, 5.94] | 1 study · 326 participants | Moderate |
Factor Xa inhibitors vs Anticoagulants Minor bleeding at 30 days ‐ Enoxaparin · Anticoagulants in ACS Factor Xa inhibitors leads to lower minor bleeding at 30 days ‐ Enoxaparin compared with anticoagulants (high certainty). Factor Xa inhibitors for acute coronary syndromes (2011) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.34 [0.28, 0.43] | 1 study · 20078 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Factor Xa inhibitors for acute coronary syndromes 2011 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.