The risk of stent thrombosis of dual antithrombotic therapy for patients who require oral anticoagulant undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights of a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background. Individual randomized trials have suggested that everolimus-eluting stents may have improved clinical outcomes compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents, but individual trials are underpowered to examine outcomes such as mortality and very late stent thrombosis. Methods. Medline, Cochrane, and conference proceedings were searched for randomized trials comparing everolimus versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention. Results. 6792 patients were included from 4 randomized controlled trials. Stent thrombosis was reduced with everolimus stents versus paclitaxel stents (0.7% versus 2.3%; OR: 0.32; CI: 0.20–0.51; P<0.00001). The reductions in stent thrombosis were observed in (i) early stent thrombosis (within 30 days) (0.2% versus 0.9%; OR: 0.24; P=0.0005), (ii) late (day 31–365) (0.2% versus 0.6%; OR: 0.32; P=0.01), and (iii) very late stent thrombosis (>365 days) (0.2% versus 0.8%; OR: 0.34; P=0.009). The rates of cardiovascular mortality were 1.2% in everolimus group and 1.6% in paclitaxel group (OR: 0.85; P=0.43). Patients receiving everolimus-eluting stents had significantly lower myocardial infarction events and target vessel revascularization as compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents. Interpretation. Everolimus compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents reduced the incidence of early, late, and very late stent thrombosis as well as target vessel revascularization.

Download Full-text

Aspirin-omitted dual antithrombotic therapy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results of a meta-analysis

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy ◽

10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa016 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Cheng-Feng Luo ◽

Pei Mo ◽

Guo-Qiang Li ◽

Shi-Ming Liu

Keyword(s):

Myocardial Infarction ◽

Atrial Fibrillation ◽

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽

Stent Thrombosis ◽

Major Bleeding ◽

Antithrombotic Therapy ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Coronary Intervention ◽

Coronary Syndrome ◽

Percutaneous Coronary

Abstract Aims To investigate the effects of aspirin-omitted dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) on myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using PubMed to search for randomized clinical trials comparing DAT with triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) in this setting. Three trials involving 8845 patients were included (4802 and 4043 patients treated with DAT and TAT, respectively). There were no significant differences in all-cause death and stroke between the aspirin-omitted DAT group and TAT group. Otherwise, the incidence of myocardial infarction was significantly higher with aspirin-omitted DAT vs. TAT [odds ratio (OR): 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02–1.63; P = 0.04; I2 = 0%]. Similarly, the incidence of stent thrombosis increased in patients treated with aspirin-omitted DAT vs. TAT (OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.02–2.53; P = 0.04; I2 = 0%). The occurrence of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis, was significantly lower with aspirin-omitted DAT vs. TAT (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48–0.78; P = 0.02; I2 = 76%). Similar results were found according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major or minor bleeding, and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding scales. Conclusion Aspirin-omitted DAT reduces the occurrence of bleeding episodes, with a higher rate of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis in NVAF patients presenting with ACS or undergoing PCI.

Download Full-text