Citations

ABSTRACT Background The optimal long‐term antithrombotic strategy after apparently successful catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) remains uncertain, particularly in patients who meet conventional guideline thresholds for oral anticoagulation (OAC). Objectives To compare continuation versus cessation strategies of long‐term OAC after successful AF ablation and to quantify net clinical benefit (NCB) integrating thromboembolic and bleeding outcomes. Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase from inception through February 2026 for randomized and comparative observational studies evaluating long‐term OAC continuation versus cessation (no OAC and/or switch to aspirin) after successful AF ablation. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB2 for randomized trials and a modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Random‐effects meta‐analyses used a restricted maximum likelihood estimator with Hartung–Knapp adjustment. NCB was calculated as: thromboembolic event rate − (1.5 × major bleeding rate). Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria (four randomized trials and two observational cohorts). Stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) events were reported in six studies and were not significantly different between OAC continuation and cessation strategies (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.24–1.99; p = 0.49). Systemic embolism (three studies) did not differ between groups ( p = 0.12). Major bleeding (five studies) was numerically higher with continued OAC but not statistically significant (OR 2.07; 95% CI 0.88–4.86; p = 0.09). In NCB analysis, continued OAC yielded more negative or near‐neutral NCB values, whereas, the cessation strategies were less negative or marginally positive; the fixed‐effect risk difference in NCB (continued OAC vs cessation) was +0.00067 (95% CI −0.00279 to +0.00413). Conclusion This meta‐analysis suggests that after successful AF ablation, continuing OAC does not significantly reduce stroke risk compared to cessation or switching to aspirin, but it may increase major bleeding. While NCB trends favor cessation, the low absolute event rates and the risk of silent AF recurrence necessitate caution.

Background: To our knowledge, there are no studies assessing associations between patients on preoperative estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) undergoing distal radius open reduction and internal fixation (DRORIF) and postoperative outcomes. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare surgical and medical complications in patients on ERT undergoing DR-ORIF with a matched control cohort. Materials and Methods: The PearlDiver Mariner database was searched for female patients who took ERT within 3 months of the index procedure. Patients were matched 1:4 with non-ERT controls using propensity score matching. Complications were assessed at 90 days, 2 years, and 5 years. Statistical analyses were conducted using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistical significance was determined at a P value of <.05. Results: The ERT cohort consisted of 1,815 ERT users, and the control cohort consisted of 7,247 patients. At 2 years, the ERT cohort was associated with a slightly greater incidence of malunion/nonunion (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.13–2.18) but with no increased risk of revision surgery (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.50–2.10). Similarly, at 5 years, the ERT cohort was associated with a slightly higher likelihood of a malunion/nonunion diagnosis (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24–2.30). Conclusion: The current study suggests that patients on preoperative ERT had a slightly increased risk of malunion/nonunion at 2 years and 5 years after DR-ORIF. We did not find associations between increases in the risk of any other major or minor complications and the cohort of patients on preoperative ERT within 5 years postoperatively.