scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Coronary Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Yi Xu ◽  
Yimin Shen ◽  
Delong Chen ◽  
Pengfei Zhao ◽  
Jun Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
P2y12 Receptor ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Stent Implantation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Receptor Inhibitor

Introduction. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different dual antiplatelet therapies (DAPTs) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing longer-term (>12 months) DAPT (L-DAPT), 12-month DAPT (DAPT 12Mo), 6-month DAPT (DAPT 6Mo), 3-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy (DAPT 3Mo + ASA), 3-month DAPT followed by a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy (DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12), or 1-month DAPT with a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy (DAPT 1Mo + P2Y12) were searched. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding, any bleeding, definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), and net adverse clinical events (NACE). This Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed with the random-effects model. Results. Twenty-four RCTs (n = 81339) were included. In comparison with L-DAPT, DAPT 6Mo (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.83), DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.18–0.82), DAPT 3Mo + ASA (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.17–0.98), and DAPT 1Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.14–0.93) were associated with a lower risk of major bleeding. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.38–0.88) reduced the risk of any bleeding when compared with DAPT 12Mo. L-DAPT decreased the risk of MI and definite or probable stent ST when compared with DAPT 6Mo. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 decreased the risk of NACE in comparison with DAPT 6Mo and DAPT 12Mo. No significant difference in all-cause mortality and cardiac death was observed. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, DAPT 6Mo was comparable to DAPT 12Mo. Conclusion. Short-term (1–3 months) DAPT is noninferior to DAPT 6Mo after DESs implantation, while L-DAPT reduces MI and definite or probable ST rates. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 might be a reasonable trade-off in patients with high risk of bleeding accompanied by ischemia.

scholarly journals Comparison of Safety and Efficacy Between Clopidogrel and Ticagrelor in Elderly Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiangkai Zhao ◽  
Jian Zhang ◽  
Jialin Guo ◽  
Jinxin Wang ◽  
Yuhui Pan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adenosine Diphosphate ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Minor Bleeding ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Receptor Inhibitor

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy combining aspirin with a P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor is a therapeutic mainstay for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, the optimal choice of P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor in elderly (aged ≥65 years) patients remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in elderly patients with ACS. Methods: We comprehensively searched in Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases through 29th March, 2021 for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor or clopidogrel plus aspirin in elderly patients with ACS. Four studies were included in the final analysis. A fixed effects model or random effects model was applied to analyze risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) across studies, and I2 to assess heterogeneity.Results: A total number of 4429 elderly patients with ACS were included in this analysis, of whom 2170 (49.0%) patients received aspirin plus ticagrelor and 2259 (51.0%) received aspirin plus clopidogrel. The ticagrelor group showed a significant advantage over the clopidogrel group concerning all-cause mortality (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63–0.96, I2 = 0%; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.95, I2 = 0%) and cardiovascular death (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56–0.91, I2 = 0%; RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62–0.94, I2 = 5%) but owned a higher risk of PLATO major or minor bleeding (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.13–1.89, I2 = 0%; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.11–1.76, I2 = 0%). Both the groups showed no significant difference regarding major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.68–1.65, I2 = 77%; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.69–1.58, I2 = 77%).Conclusion: For elderly ACS patients, aspirin plus ticagrelor reduces cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality but increases the risk of bleeding. Herein, aspirin plus ticagrelor may extend lifetime for elderly ACS patients compared with aspirin plus clopidogrel. The optimal DAPT for elderly ACS patients may be a valuable direction for future research studies.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592090754
Author(s):  
Miao Liu ◽  
Guiyue Wang ◽  
Yuhang Li ◽  
Hongliang Wang ◽  
Haitao Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Background: Thrombosis is a common complication in patients with cancer. Whether thromboprophylaxis could benefit patients with cancer is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer undergoing surgery or chemotherapy. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and Web of Science for studies published before May 2018 to investigate whether thromboprophylaxis measures were more effective than a placebo in patients with cancer. Results: In total, 33 trials with 11,942 patients with cancer were identified. In patients with cancer undergoing surgery, the administration of thromboprophylaxis was associated with decreasing trends in venous thromboembolism (VTE) [relative risk (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32–0.81] and DVT (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33–0.87). In patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, the administration of thromboprophylaxis reduced the incidences of VTE, DVT, and pulmonary embolism compared with no thromboprophylaxis (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40–0.73; RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31–0.73; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.81, respectively). The pooled results regarding major bleeding showed no significant difference between prophylaxis and no prophylaxis in either the surgical or the chemotherapy groups (RR 2.35, 95% CI 0.74–7.52, p = 0.1482, I2 = 0%; RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93–1.83, p = 0.1274, I2 = 0%, respectively). Conclusion: Thromboprophylaxis did not increase major bleeding events or the incidence of thrombocytopenia. All-cause mortality was not significantly different between those who received thromboprophylaxis and those who did not. This meta-analysis provides evidence that thromboprophylaxis can reduce the number of VTE and DVT events, with no apparent increase in the incidence of major bleeding in patients with cancer.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Long‐Term Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Network Meta‐analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Houyong Zhu ◽  
Xiaoqun Xu ◽  
Xiaojiang Fang ◽  
Fei Ying ◽  
Liuguang Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
High Risk Factors ◽  
Cerebrovascular Events

Background Long‐term antithrombotic strategies for patients with chronic coronary syndrome with high‐risk factors represent an important treatment dilemma in clinical practice. Our aim was to conduct a network meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long‐term antithrombotic strategies in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Methods and Results Four randomized studies were included (n=75167; THEMIS [Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in Diabetes Mellitus Patients Intervention Study], COMPASS [Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies], PEGASUS‐TIMI 54 [Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 54], and DAPT [Dual Anti‐platelet Therapy]). The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs) were calculated as the measure of effect size. The results of the network meta‐analysis showed that, compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial‐defined major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were 0.86; (95% CI, 0.80–0.93) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.78–1.02) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.64–0.85) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.60,–0.86) for thienopyridine plus aspirin. Compared with aspirin monotherapy, the ORs for trial‐defined major bleeding were 2.15 (95% CI, 1.78–2.59]) for ticagrelor plus aspirin, 1.51 (95% CI, 1.23–1.85) for rivaroxaban monotherapy, and 1.68 (95% CI, 1.37–2.05) for rivaroxaban plus aspirin. For death from any cause, the improvement effect of rivaroxaban plus aspirin was detected versus aspirin monotherapy (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65–0.90), ticagrelor plus aspirin (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66–0.95), rivaroxaban monotherapy (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69–0.97), and thienopyridine plus aspirin (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41–0.82) regimens. Conclusions All antithrombotic strategies combined with aspirin significantly reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and increased the risk of major bleeding compared with aspirin monotherapy. Considering the outcomes of all ischemic and bleeding events and all‐cause mortality, rivaroxaban plus aspirin appears to be the preferred long‐term antithrombotic regimen for patients with chronic coronary syndrome and high‐risk factors.

scholarly journals The safety of morphine use in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis

Heart Asia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e011142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rugheed Ghadban ◽  
Tariq Enezate ◽  
Joshua Payne ◽  
Haytham Allaham ◽  
Ahmad Halawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Minor Bleeding ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

BackgroundMorphine is widely used for pain control in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Several studies have questioned the safety of morphine in this setting with a concern of interaction with and reduced efficacy of antiplatelet agents.ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically review the safety of morphine use in ACS.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried from inception through April 2018. Studies comparing morphine to nonmorphine use in ACS were included. Study endpoints included: in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, minor bleeding and dyspnoea.ResultsA total of 64 323 patients with ACS were included from eight studies, seven of which were observational studies and one was a randomised controlled trial. The use of morphine was associated with increased risk of in-hospital recurrent MI (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.43, p < 0.00001). There was, however, no significant difference in terms of all-cause mortality (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.22, p = 0.44), stroke (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.66, p = 0.57), major bleeding (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.00, p = 0.05), minor bleeding (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.34, p = 0.97), or dyspnoea (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.83, p = 0.33).ConclusionThe use of morphine for pain control in ACS was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital recurrent MI. Randomised clinical trials are needed to further investigate the safety of morphine in ACS.

3054Efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I Cavallari ◽  
G Verolino ◽  
G Patti
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Systemic Embolism ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Anticoagulation in patients with cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) is particularly challenging given the higher risk of both thrombotic and bleeding complications in this setting. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in AF patients with malignancy remain unclear. Purpose In the present meta-analysis we further investigate the efficacy and safety of NOACs compared to warfarin in patients with AF and cancer assuming that available studies may be individually underpowered for endpoints at low incidence, i.e. stroke, major and intracranial bleeding. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the use of NOACs vs. warfarin in AF patients with cancer. Efficacy outcome measures included stroke or systemic embolism, venous thromboembolism and mortality. Safety outcome measures were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. Results We pooled data from 6 identified studies enrolling a total of 31,756 AF patients with cancer. Mean follow-up was 1.7 years. Patients with cancer had significantly increased annualized rates of venous thromboembolism (1.38% vs. 0.74%), major bleeding (9.01% vs. 5.13%), in particular major gastrointestinal bleeding (2.38% vs. 1.60%), and all-cause mortality (17.73% vs. 8.50%) vs. those without (all P values <0.001), whereas the incidence of stroke or systemic embolism and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ. Compared with warfarin, treatment with NOACs nominally decreased the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (5.41% vs. 2.70%; odds ratio, OR; 95% confidence intervals, CI 0.51, 0.26–1.01; P=0.05; Figure), mainly of ischemic stroke (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35–0.89; P=0.01), and the risk of venous thromboembolism (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.42–0.61; P<0.001). In cancer patients receiving NOACs there was a significant reduction of major bleeding (3.95% vs. 4.66%; OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.94; P=0.02; Figure) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.26% vs. 0.66%; OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08–0.82; P=0.02) vs. warfarin, with no difference in gastrointestinal major bleeding rates. Conclusion AF patients on oral anticoagulation and concomitant cancer are at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality. NOACs may represent a safer and more effective alternative to warfarin also in this setting of patients.

scholarly journals Relationship of PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT scores with mortality in patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome who undergo coronary stent implantation

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Alak ◽  
E Ozpelit ◽  
D Cirgamis ◽  
M Abusharekh ◽  
N Baris
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Stent Implantation ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Relationship Of

Abstract Introduction International guidelines recommend using risk score tools that allow us to assess the risk of bleeding and ischemia when deciding on DAPT. In our research, we aimed to examine the mortality relationship of new risk scores, DAPT and PRECISE-DAPT scores. Method Between 2013–2014, 948 patients admitted to our clinic with ACS were included in our study. We excluded 688 patient (no contact number,CABG, medical treatment, use of oral anticoagulation, active malignant cancer). 260 patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome (58%, 8 STEMI, 35%, 4 non-STEMI, 5%, 4 Unstable angina pectoris) who undergo coronary stent implantation were included in the study. We aimed to focus on the patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention and their risk of mortality. The patients' records were retrospectively analyzed through the hospital information system and archive records. Laboratory results, echocardiography and CAG reports of the patients, disease histories were obtained from the information recorded through the system. With these data, PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT scores of patients were calculated. Results The number of patients with a PRECISE-DAPT Score ≥25 was 62 (23.8%). The number of patients with DAPT Score ≥2 was 193 (74.2%). Mortality occurred in 49 (18.8%) patients. Patients with PRECISE-DAPT ≥25 and those with PRECISE-DAPT &lt;25 were compared in terms of mortality and mortality was significantly higher in the high-scoring group [P &lt;0.001 OR 6.94 C (3.53–13.62)]. The patients were divided into 4 groups (PRECISE-DAPT 25 and DAPT ≥2, PRECISE-DAPT ≥25 and DAPT ≥2, PRECISE-DAPT 25 and DAPT 2, PRECISE-DAPT ≥25 and DAPT 2) according to PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT score. Mortality was significantly higher regardless of DAPT score in patients with high PRECISE-DAPT scores (p&lt;0.001). We evaluated the relationship between PRECISE-DAPT score and major bleeding and all bleeding. Compared to the group there was no significant difference in all bleeding events (P=0.56) and major bleeding events (P=0.23). The relationship between bleeding events and mortality was evaluated. There was no significant difference in mortality (p=0.689) with all bleeding events; but mortality was significantly increased in patients with major bleeding [P=0.025 OR 6.16 (1,33–28,49)]. Conclusion In our study, we observed that the patient group with a high PRECISE-DAPT score had a high mortality rate regardless of the DAPT score. The PRECISE-DAPT score is a useful tool in determining the group with high long-term mortality in patients who present with acute coronary syndrome and undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. The clinician should use the PRECISE-DAPT score when deciding on the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in this patient group and these patients with high scores need to be monitored more closely. The data we have obtained from our study is retrospective and these results need to be supported by prospective and large studies. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Prasugrel Versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome or Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuttana Wonngsalap ◽  
Supakorn Ungsriwong ◽  
Wanalee Kumtepm ◽  
Surasak Saokaew ◽  
Vichai Senthong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Abstract Purpose To assess the efficacy and safety of prasugrel at low doses compared to clopidogrel by looking at the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and major bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing efficacy and safety of low-dose prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with ACS or undergoing PCI up to May 22, 2020. We did a meta-analysis using a random-effects model to estimate relative risks (RRs). The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were MACE and major bleeding, respectively. Results Six RCTs (n = 6,131) and six observational studies (n = 31,426) were included. There was no MACE reduction in patients receiving low-dose prasugrel compared with those receiving clopidogrel (RR 1.02, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.14), but there was an increased risk of major bleeding (RR 1.35, 95%CI 1.10 to 1.67). Conclusions Low-dose prasugrel yields no increase in efficacy when compared with clopidogrel, but it does expose patients to an increased risk of bleeding. Most studies considered here were conducted in Japan. Studies conducted with non-Asian patients may find that low-dose prasugrel offers a more favorable efficacy and risk profile. Considering the results of this analysis we believe low-dose prasugrel should be prescribed with extreme caution as it may result in bleeding events without any additional benefit over clopidogrel.

scholarly journals Dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Xu ◽  
Yimin Shen ◽  
Pengfei Zhao ◽  
Yuanyuan Han ◽  
Jun Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Drug Eluting Stents ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Drug Eluting

Abstract Background: This network meta-analysis was committed to evaluating the efficacy and safety of different dual antiplatelet therapies (DAPTs) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs).Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two of the following DAPT strategies: long-term (>12 months) DAPT (L-DAPT), 12-months DAPT (DAPT 12Mo), short-term (≤6 months) DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy (S-DAPT+ASA), short-term DAPT followed by a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy (S-DAPT+P2Y12) were searched. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, major bleeding, any bleeding, definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). This Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed with the random-effects model.Results: Twenty-four RCTs (n=81,376) were included. L-DAPT increased the risk of major bleeding (OR 2.37, 95%CI 1.32-5.03 compared with S-DAPT+P2Y12) and any bleeding (OR 2.95, 95%CI 1.91-4.34 compared with S-DAPT+P2Y12). When compared with L-DAPT, DAPT 12Mo (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.13-2.02) and DAPT+ASA (OR 1.67, 95%CI 1.22-2.19) were associated with higher rates of MI, but S-DAPT+P2Y12 obtained no statistical difference. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the risks of major bleeding and any bleeding further increased for ≥18 months of DAPT. In the subgroup analysis, short-term DAPT (S-DAPT) presented similar efficacy and safety to DAPT 12Mo for patients with the acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and lower risks of major bleeding and all-cause mortality were observed in S-DAPT+P2Y12 among patients with newer-generation DES.Conclusions: S-DAPT+P2Y12 presented superiority in patients with all clinical presentations, for a lower risk of bleeding and not associated with increased ischemic harm. Besides, prospective research between aspirin monotherapy and P2Y12 monotherapy was required.

Anticoagulants for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: An updated pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14692-e14692
Author(s):  
Shima Sidahmed ◽  
Ahmed Abdalla ◽  
Babikir Kheiri ◽  
Areeg Bala ◽  
Mohammed Salih ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Vitamin K ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

e14692 Background: Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common. Although low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is the standard therapy in this setting, little is known with regard to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Therefore, we thought about evaluating the safety and efficacy of various anticoagulants in this vulnerable population. Methods: Electronic database search was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared LMWH, NOACs, and/or vitamin-K-antagonists (VKA) in cancer patients. We performed frequentist direct and Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism and deep-vein thrombosis) recurrence. Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Results: We identified 13 RCTs with 6,595 total patients (mean age 62.4 ± 12.2; 50.4% female; 17.7% hematological malignancies; and 6 months median follow-up). The most common cancer type was colorectal and 48% of the population had metastatic cancer at baseline. NOACs were associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.40-0.83; P < 0.01; number needed to treat [NNT] = 40) and LMWH (OR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.25-0.85; P = 0.01; NNT = 20). LMHW was associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.39-0.71; P < 0.01; NNT = 18). NOACs were associated with significantly reduced major bleeding compared with VKA (OR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.35-0.91; P = 0.02; NNT = 64). There was no significant difference identified between the anticoagulant groups in regard to all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Among cancer patients with VTE, NOACs were associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared to LMWH and VKA, and significantly reduced major bleeding compared with VKA. LMWH was associated with significantly reduced VTE recurrence compared with VKA.

scholarly journals Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l2222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shang-He-Lin Yin ◽  
Peng Xu ◽  
Bian Wang ◽  
Yao Lu ◽  
Qiao-Yu Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Drug Eluting Stent ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Standard Term

Abstract Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of standard term (12 months) or long term (>12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) versus short term (<6 months) DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Relevant studies published between June 1983 and April 2018 from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library for clinical trials, PubMed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Clinicaltrialsregister.eu. Review methods Randomised controlled trials comparing two of the three durations of DAPT (short term, standard term, and long term) after PCI with DES were included. The primary study outcomes were cardiac or non-cardiac death, all cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and all bleeding events. Results 17 studies (n=46 864) were included. Compared with short term DAPT, network meta-analysis showed that long term DAPT resulted in higher rates of major bleeding (odds ratio 1.78, 95% confidence interval 1.27 to 2.49) and non-cardiac death (1.63, 1.03 to 2.59); standard term DAPT was associated with higher rates of any bleeding (1.39, 1.01 to 1.92). No noticeable difference was observed in other primary endpoints. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the risks of non-cardiac death and bleeding were further increased for ≥18 months of DAPT compared with short term or standard term DAPT. In the subgroup analysis, long term DAPT led to higher all cause mortality than short term DAPT in patients implanted with newer-generation DES (1.99, 1.04 to 3.81); short term DAPT presented similar efficacy and safety to standard term DAPT with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presentation and newer-generation DES placement. The heterogeneity of pooled trials was low, providing more confidence in the interpretation of results. Conclusions In patients with all clinical presentations, compared with short term DAPT (clopidogrel), long term DAPT led to higher rates of major bleeding and non-cardiac death, and standard term DAPT was associated with an increased risk of any bleeding. For patients with ACS, short term DAPT presented similar efficacy and safety with standard term DAPT. For patients implanted with newer-generation DES, long term DAPT resulted in more all cause mortality than short term DAPT. Although the optimal duration of DAPT should take personal ischaemic and bleeding risks into account, this study suggested short term DAPT could be considered for most patients after PCI with DES, combining evidence from both direct and indirect comparisons. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018099519.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document