scholarly journals Frailty Predicts Poor Prognosis of Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Wang ◽  
Shutang Zhang ◽  
Ke Zhang ◽  
Jie Tian
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Subgroup Analyses

Background: Frailty has been related to a higher risk of cardiovascular events, while the association between frailty and outcomes for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis of cohort studies to evaluate the above association.Methods: Cohort studies aiming to determine the potential independent association between frailty and clinical outcomes after PCI were identified by search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to February 22, 2021. A random-effects model that incorporates the possible heterogeneity among the included studies was used to combine the results.Results: Ten cohort studies with 7,449,001 patients were included. Pooled results showed that frailty was independently associated with higher incidence of all-cause mortality [adjusted risk ratio (RR) = 2.94, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.90–4.56, I2 = 56%, P < 0.001] and major adverse cardiovascular events [(MACEs), adjusted RR = 2.11, 95% CI: 1.32–3.66, I2 = 0%, P = 0.002]. Sensitivity analyses limited to studies including elderly patients showed consistent results (mortality: RR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.51–3.41, I2 = 23%, P < 0.001; MACEs: RR = 2.44, 95% CI: 1.44–4.31, I2 = 0%, P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that characteristics of study design, follow-up duration, or type of PCI did not seem to significantly affect the associations (P-values for subgroup analyses all >0.05).Conclusions: Frailty may be an independent risk factor of poor prognosis for patients with CAD after PCI.

scholarly journals EFFECTIVENESS OF TICAGRELOR COMPARED TO CLOPIDOGREL IN REDUCING THE RISK OF MAJOR ADVERSE CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS IN PATIENTS WITH CORONARY HEART DISEASE AFTER PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendra Wana Nur’amin ◽  
Iwan Dwiprahasto ◽  
Erna Kristin
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Repeat Revascularization ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Objective: Antiplatelet therapy is recommended in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) who had the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). There has been a lack of population-based studies that showed the superior effectiveness of ticagrelor over clopidogrel and similar studies have not been conducted in Indonesia yet. The aim of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in reducing the risk of MACE in patients with CHD after PCI.Methods: A retrospective cohort study with 1-year follow-up was conducted. 361 patients consisted of 111 patients with ticagrelor exposure and 250 patients with clopidogrel exposure. The primary outcome was MACE, defined as a composite of repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction, or all-cause death. The association between antiplatelet exposure and the MACE was analyzed with Cox proportional hazard regression, adjusted for sex, age, comorbid, PCI procedures and concomitant therapy.Results: MACE occurred in 22.7% of the subjects. Clopidogrel had a significantly higher risk of MACE compared with ticagrelor (28.8%, vs 9.0%, hazard ratio (HR): 1.96 (95% CI 1.01 to 3.81, p=0.047). There were no significant differences in risk of repeat revascularization (20.40% vs 5.40%, HR: 2.32, 95% CI 0.99 to 5.42, p = 0.05), myocardial infarction (11.60% vs 3.60%, HR: 2.08, 95% CI, 0.73 to 5.93, p = 0.17), and death (1.60% vs 1.80%, HR: 0.77, 95% CI, 0.14 to 4.25, p = 0.77).Conclusion: Clopidogrel had a higher risk of MACE compared to clopidogrel in patients with CHD after PCI, but there were no significant differences in the risk of repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction, and all-cause death. 

Abstract 291: Platelet Function Monitoring After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.

2017 ◽  
Vol 121 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akintunde M Akinjero ◽  
Oluwole Adegbala ◽  
Esosa Edo-Osagie ◽  
Nike Akinjero ◽  
Tomi Akinyemiju
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Platelet Function ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Cardiovascular Death ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Funnel Plot ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Background: The need to balance bleeding and clotting risks after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has led to interest in platelet function monitoring as a strategy to improve post-PCI outcomes. The prognostic value of platelet function testing in monitoring response to antiplatelet therapy after PCI remains unclear. Prior studies have been inconclusive. We sought to conduct an updated meta-analysis to address this gap in knowledge. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of EMBASE, PUBMED and the Cochrane libraries for studies since inception to December 2016 on platelet function monitoring. Our search yielded 203 studies, out of which 83 were extracted for full-text review. Only 3 studies met inclusion criteria. We pooled odds ratios using random-effects statistics, Mantel-Haenszel method. I2 and Chi- squared statistic was used to evaluate for heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot. Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). This was defined in the studies as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and bleeding complications. Results: The 3 randomized controlled trials that were analyzed involved 3701 patients. There were 550 MACE (29.76%) in the platelet function monitored group compared with 514 (27.74%) in the control. MACE (Figure 1) was not significantly higher for the platelet function monitored group during follow-up compared with control (pooled Odds Ratio:1.11 [95% CI: 0.96-1.28], p = 0.15). Tests for heterogeneity were not significant, with I2 of 0%, Chi2 = 1.52 (p = 0.47); and small study bias was absent on visual inspection of the funnel plot. Conclusions: Platelet function monitoring continues to be used in practice. Results from this meta-analysis show no benefit of platelet function monitoring compared with conventional strategy with regards to MACE after PCI. Future research is needed to further evaluate this finding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document