Prasugrel versus ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention; a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Z Rodriguez ◽  
A Valdecanas ◽  
N Palileo
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
P Value ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with ASA and a P2Y12 inhibitor is the cornerstone of anti-thrombotic therapy for patients undergoing PCI. The 2014 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) guidelines on myocardial revascularization recommend DAPT with prasugrel or ticagrelor over clopidogrel, however, a comparison between the efficacy in reducing all cause mortality and major bleeding of prasugrel versus ticagrelor is sparse. Objectives To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) in the determination of the efficacy and safety of prasugrel as compared to ticagrelor among ACS patients undergoing PCI. Methods Extensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, EMBASE, Google scholar, Medline and Herdin was done up to November 2019. Studies were limited to RCTs comparing ticagrelor vs. prasugrel among acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing PCI. Outcome measures include all-cause mortality and major bleeding. Statistical analysis was done using Review manager V5.3. Results Thirteen RCTs with 6086 patients were included in this study. Pooled analysis using random effects model showed no difference in reduction of all-cause mortality between prasugrel versus ticagrelor (92 vs 107, RR of 0.77, 95% CI of 0.58–1.02, p-value of 0.07, I2 of 0%). Likewise, major bleeding (using BARC and TIMI as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction definitio) was similar between prasugrel and ticagrelor (91 vs 111, RR of 0.83, 95% CI of 0.63–1.09, p-value of 0.18, I2 of 0%). Conclusion There were no significant differences in the reduction of all cause mortality and major bleeding among ACS patients undergoing PCI receiving prasugrel versus ticagrelor. Our study may support the equal recommendation of both P2Y12 inhibitors as in the above guidelines. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated With New Generation Stents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Jiao Zhang ◽  
Xuan Qiao ◽  
Wen-Fen Guo ◽  
Xi-Ying Liang ◽  
Yan Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Target Vessel Revascularization ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
New Generation

Background and Objective: The optimum duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remains uncertain in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with new generation stents. This meta-analysis was performed to investigate ischemia and bleeding outcomes with different DAPT strategies.Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of science from inception to May 27, 2020, were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials were included to compare short-term (6 months or less) with standard (12 months) DAPT in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with new generation stents. The primary endpoints were myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis and major bleeding. The secondary endpoints included all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, target vessel revascularization and net adverse clinical events. Random effect model and fixed effect model were used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of each endpoint.Results: Four randomized controlled trials and seven subgroup analyses of larger randomized controlled trials, including a total of 21,344 patients with acute coronary syndrome, met our inclusion criteria. The shorter DAPT was associated with significantly lower major bleeding compared with the standard DAPT (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56–0.90, P = 0.005, I2 = 25%), while without increasing the risk of myocardial infarction (OR 1.18, 0.88–1.58, P = 0.28, I2 = 20%), definite or probable stent thrombosis (OR 1.60, 0.98–2.59, P = 0.06, I2 = 0%). No significantly difference was observed in the risk of all-cause death (OR 0.96, 0.72–1.27, P = 0.76, I2 = 2%), cardiovascular death (OR 0.91, 0.62–1.33, P = 0.62, I2 = 0%), stroke (OR 0.84, 0.54–1.30, P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), target vessel revascularization (OR 1.14, 0.84–1.55, P = 0.41, I2 = 8%), and net adverse clinical events (OR 0.93, 0.80–1.07, P = 0.3, I2 = 18%) between the two groups.Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with new generation stents, the shorter DAPT leads to a marked reduction in the risk of major bleeding compared with the standard DAPT. This benefit is achieved without increasing the risk of mortality or ischemic outcomes. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020189871).

Abstract 325: Prasugrel vs Ticagrelor for Dapt Therapy in Patients With Acs Undergoing Pci; A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Al-Abdouh ◽  
Mahmoud Amr ◽  
Nazir Savji ◽  
Di Zhao ◽  
Rani K Hasan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Stent Thrombosis ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a P2Y12 inhibitor added to aspirin is considered the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous intervention (PCI). Prasugrel and ticagrelor are commonly used P2Y12 inhibitors. However, few head-to-head randomized controlled trials have been performed to directly compare the efficacy and safety of these two agents when used in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane library. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, major bleeding, and all bleeding event. Estimates were calculated as random effects risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Six trials with 6807 patients were included [ FIGURE ]. There were no significant differences in MACE (RR 0.93; 95% CI [0.72-1.20]; p = 0.59; I 2 = 26%), all-cause mortality (RR 0.92; 95% CI [0.73-1.17]; p = 0.51; I 2 = 0%),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI [0.75-1.31]; p = 0.96; I 2 = 0%), MI (RR 0.87; 95% CI [0.60-1.27]; p = 0.48; I 2 = 27%), stent thrombosis (RR 0.64; 95% CI [0.39-1.04]; p = 0.07; I 2 = 0%), major bleeding (RR 0.94; 95% CI [0.70-1.26]; p = 0.68; I 2 = 6%), and all bleeding events (RR 0.92; 95% CI [0.77-1.09]; p = 0.32; I 2 = 0%) when ticagrelor was compared to prasugrel. Conclusion: There are no significant difference of MACE, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, stent thrombosis, and bleeding between prasugrel and ticagrelor for DAPT in PCI for ACS based current clinical trial data. However, the most recently published and largest of these trials suggests a reduction in MACE. More such comparisons are warranted to inform clinical practice.

scholarly journals Early aspirin discontinuation following acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Guedeney ◽  
J Mesnier ◽  
S Sorrentino ◽  
F Abcha ◽  
M Zeitouni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background The respective ischemic and bleeding risks of early aspirin discontinuation following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains uncertain. Objectives To evaluate the safety and efficacy of early aspirin discontinuation in ACS or PCI patients treated with P2Y12 inhibitors with or without anticoagulants. Methods We performed a review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a P2Y12 inhibitor-based single antiplatelet strategy following early aspirin discontinuation to a strategy of sustained dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in ACS or PCI patients requiring or not anticoagulation for another indication. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding while non-major bleeding and all bleeding were secondary safety endpoints. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality while secondary efficacy endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST) or any stroke. We estimated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random effect models. The study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019139576). Results We included 9 RCTs comprising 40,621 patients.Compared to prolonged DAPT, major bleeding (2.2% vs. 2.8%; RR 0.68; 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.87; p=0.002; I2: 63%), non-major bleeding (5.0% vs. 6.1%; RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.94; p=0.02; I2:87%) and all bleeding (7.4% vs. 9.9%; RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.79; p<0.0001; I2: 88%) were significantly reduced with early aspirin discontinuation (Figure 1), without significant difference for all-cause death (p=0.60), MACCE (p=0.60), MI (p=0.77), definite ST (p=0.63), and any stroke (p=0.59). Results were consistent in patients with or without anticoagulation, without significant interaction for any outcomes but MI (p=0.04). Conclusions In patients on DAPT after an ACS or a PCI, early aspirin discontinuation prevents bleeding events with no effect on the ischemic risk or mortality. Figure 1. Central illustration Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

P6268Cardiovascular outcomes of new anti-diabetic agents - A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Lin ◽  
C Parco ◽  
M Brockmeyer ◽  
A Karathanos ◽  
V Schulze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Placebo Control ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Major Cardiovascular Events ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background and purpose The risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE) is increased in patients with diabetes mellitus. Recently published clinical trials of three different pharmacological classes (DPP4 inhibitors (DPP4i), SGLT2-inhibitors (SGLT2i), GLP-1-receptor-antagonists (GLP1RA)) of new anti-diabetic agents (ADA) showed potential benefits for cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. We thus aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these ADA to elucidate benefits on CV outcomes in diabetic patients. Methods Following a systematic online database search, all RCTs reporting CV outcomes of DPP4i, SGLT2i or GLP1RA vs. Placebo in diabetic patients up until December 2018 were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Studies including patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were excluded. Data were abstracted and analyzed with the inverse-variance method and a random-effects model, hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as summary statistics. CV outcomes of MACE, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), CV death and all-cause mortality were analyzed. Results Eleven RCTs (DPP4i: SAVOR, TECOS, CARMELINA; GLP1RA: LEADER, SUSTAIN-6, EXSCEL, Harmony; SGLT2i: EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS Program, DECLARE) with 109,316 patients were selected for inclusion. ELIXA and EXAMINE were excluded due to their inclusion of patients with ACS, CAROLINA was excluded for lack of placebo-control. In the pooled meta-analysis of all trials, ADA significantly reduced the risk for MACE (Hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, CI 0.86–0.96, p=0.0004), MI (HR 0.91, CI 0.85–0.96, p=0.02), CV death (HR 0.9, CI 0.82–0.99, P=0.02) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.92, CI 0.85–0.99, p=0.03). There was no difference in the risk for stroke (HR 0.94, CI 0.87–1.02, p=0.16) and HF (HR 0.88, CI 0.76–1.02, p=0.08). In agent-specific subgroup analyses, GLP1RA and SGLT2i showed significant reductions in MACE (GLP1RA: HR 0.85, CI 0.78–0.92, p<0.0001; SGLT2i: HR 0.89, CI 0.83–0.96, p=0.001), MI (GLP1RA: HR 0.86, CI 0.76–0.98, p=0.02; SGLT2i: HR 0.88, CI 0.79–0.97, p=0.01) and all-cause mortality (GLP1RA: HR 0.88, CI 0.81–0.95; p=0.001; SGLT2i: HR 0.83, CI 0.70–0.99; p=0.03). GLP1RA significantly reduced risk for stroke (HR 0.85, CI 0.75–0.96, p=0.008) and CV death (HR 0.86, CI 0.78–0.95, p=0.002). SGLT2I were especially effective in the reduction of risk for HF (HR 0.69, CI 0.61–0.79; p<0.0001). DPP4i inhibitors however failed to show superiority in all analyzed outcomes. Conclusions This meta-analysis lends evidence to GLP1RA and SGLT2i benefits for MACE, MI and all-cause mortality, while DPP4i failed to show superiority in cardiovascular outcomes. Individualized medication for diabetic patients depending on CV disease status should be considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document