-
Pharmacotherapy Apr 2022Rifamycins (rifampin, rifabutin, and rifapentine) play an essential role in the treatment of mycobacterial and some nonmycobacterial infections. They also induce the... (Review)
Review
Rifamycins (rifampin, rifabutin, and rifapentine) play an essential role in the treatment of mycobacterial and some nonmycobacterial infections. They also induce the activity of various drug transporting and metabolizing enzymes, which can impact the concentrations and efficacy of substrates. Many anticoagulant and antiplatelet (AC/AP) agents are substrates of these enzymes and have narrow therapeutic indices, leading to risks of thrombosis or bleeding when coadministered with rifamycins. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects on AC/AP pharmacokinetics, laboratory markers, and clinical safety and efficacy of combined use with rifamycins. A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidance was performed. The PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were queried for English-language reports on combination use of rifamycins and AC/AP agents from database inception through August 2021. The 29 studies identified examined warfarin (n = 17), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (n = 8), and antiplatelet agents (n = 4) combined with rifampin (n = 28) or rifabutin (n = 1). Eleven studies were case reports or small case series; 14 reported on pharmacokinetic or laboratory markers in healthy volunteers. Rifampin-warfarin combinations led to reductions in warfarin area under the curve (AUC) of 15%-74%, with variability by warfarin isomer and study. Warfarin dose increases of up to 3-5 times prerifampin doses were required to maintain coagulation parameters in the therapeutic range. DOAC AUCs were decreased by 20%-67%, with variability by individual agent and with rifampin versus rifabutin. The active metabolite of clopidogrel increased substantially with rifampin coadministration, whereas prasugrel was largely unaffected and ticagrelor saw decreases. Our review suggests most combinations of AC/AP agents and rifampin are problematic. Further studies are required to determine whether rifabutin or rifapentine could be safe alternatives for coadministration with AC/AP drugs.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Drug Interactions; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Rifabutin; Rifampin; Rifamycins; Warfarin
PubMed: 35152432
DOI: 10.1002/phar.2672 -
JAMA Jan 2019The role for aspirin in cardiovascular primary prevention remains controversial, with potential benefits limited by an increased bleeding risk. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The role for aspirin in cardiovascular primary prevention remains controversial, with potential benefits limited by an increased bleeding risk.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the association of aspirin use for primary prevention with cardiovascular events and bleeding.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase were searched on Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials from the earliest available date through November 1, 2018.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials enrolling at least 1000 participants with no known cardiovascular disease and a follow-up of at least 12 months were included. Included studies compared aspirin use with no aspirin (placebo or no treatment).
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were screened and extracted independently by both investigators. Bayesian and frequentist meta-analyses were performed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke. The primary bleeding outcome was any major bleeding (defined by the individual studies).
RESULTS
A total of 13 trials randomizing 164 225 participants with 1 050 511 participant-years of follow-up were included. The median age of trial participants was 62 years (range, 53-74), 77 501 (47%) were men, 30 361 (19%) had diabetes, and the median baseline risk of the primary cardiovascular outcome was 9.2% (range, 2.6%-15.9%). Aspirin use was associated with significant reductions in the composite cardiovascular outcome compared with no aspirin (57.1 per 10 000 participant-years with aspirin and 61.4 per 10 000 participant-years with no aspirin) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89 [95% credible interval, 0.84-0.95]; absolute risk reduction, 0.38% [95% CI, 0.20%-0.55%]; number needed to treat, 265). Aspirin use was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding events compared with no aspirin (23.1 per 10 000 participant-years with aspirin and 16.4 per 10 000 participant-years with no aspirin) (HR, 1.43 [95% credible interval, 1.30-1.56]; absolute risk increase, 0.47% [95% CI, 0.34%-0.62%]; number needed to harm, 210).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The use of aspirin in individuals without cardiovascular disease was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events and an increased risk of major bleeding. This information may inform discussions with patients about aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events and bleeding.
Topics: Aspirin; Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Primary Prevention; Risk
PubMed: 30667501
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.20578 -
JAMA Aug 2022The role of ticagrelor with or without aspirin after coronary artery bypass graft surgery remains unclear. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The role of ticagrelor with or without aspirin after coronary artery bypass graft surgery remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the risks of vein graft failure and bleeding associated with ticagrelor dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or ticagrelor monotherapy vs aspirin among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 1, 2022, without language restriction.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of ticagrelor DAPT or ticagrelor monotherapy vs aspirin on saphenous vein graft failure.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Individual patient data provided by each trial were synthesized into a combined data set for independent analysis. Multilevel logistic regression models were used.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary analysis assessed the incidence of saphenous vein graft failure per graft (primary outcome) in RCTs comparing ticagrelor DAPT with aspirin. Secondary outcomes were saphenous vein graft failure per patient and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events. A supplementary analysis included RCTs comparing ticagrelor monotherapy with aspirin.
RESULTS
A total of 4 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, involving 1316 patients and 1668 saphenous vein grafts. Of the 871 patients in the primary analysis, 435 received ticagrelor DAPT (median age, 67 years [IQR, 60-72 years]; 65 women [14.9%]; 370 men [85.1%]) and 436 received aspirin (median age, 66 years [IQR, 61-73 years]; 63 women [14.5%]; 373 men [85.5%]). Ticagrelor DAPT was associated with a significantly lower incidence of saphenous vein graft failure (11.2%) per graft than was aspirin (20%; difference, -8.7% [95% CI, -13.5% to -3.9%]; OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.74]; P < .001) and was associated with a significantly lower incidence of saphenous vein graft failure per patient (13.2% vs 23.0%, difference, -9.7% [95% CI, -14.9% to -4.4%]; OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.74]; P < .001). Ticagrelor DAPT (22.1%) was associated with a significantly higher incidence of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events than was aspirin (8.7%; difference, 13.3% [95% CI, 8.6% to 18.0%]; OR, 2.98 [95% CI, 1.99 to 4.47]; P < .001), but not BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events (1.8% vs 1.8%, difference, 0% [95% CI, -1.8% to 1.8%]; OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.37 to 2.69]; P = .99). Compared with aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy was not significantly associated with saphenous vein graft failure (19.3% vs 21.7%, difference, -2.6% [95% CI, -9.1% to 3.9%]; OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27]; P = .44) or BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events (8.9% vs 7.3%, difference, 1.7% [95% CI, -2.8% to 6.1%]; OR, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.69 to 2.29]; P = .46).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery, adding ticagrelor to aspirin was associated with a significantly decreased risk of vein graft failure. However, this was accompanied by a significantly increased risk of clinically important bleeding.
Topics: Aged; Aspirin; Coronary Artery Bypass; Female; Graft Occlusion, Vascular; Hemorrhage; Humans; Male; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Saphenous Vein; Ticagrelor; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35943473
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.11966 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Pre-eclampsia is associated with deficient intravascular production of prostacyclin, a vasodilator, and excessive production of thromboxane, a vasoconstrictor and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pre-eclampsia is associated with deficient intravascular production of prostacyclin, a vasodilator, and excessive production of thromboxane, a vasoconstrictor and stimulant of platelet aggregation. These observations led to the hypotheses that antiplatelet agents, low-dose aspirin in particular, might prevent or delay development of pre-eclampsia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of antiplatelet agents, such as aspirin and dipyridamole, when given to women at risk of developing pre-eclampsia.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (30 March 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies. We updated the search in September 2019 and added the results to the awaiting classification section of the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials comparing antiplatelet agents with either placebo or no antiplatelet agent were included. Studies only published in abstract format were eligible for inclusion if sufficient information was available. We would have included cluster-randomised trials in the analyses along with individually-randomised trials, if any had been identified in our search strategy. Quasi-random studies were excluded. Participants were pregnant women at risk of developing pre-eclampsia. Interventions were administration of an antiplatelet agent (such as low-dose aspirin or dipyridamole), comparisons were either placebo or no antiplatelet.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For this update we incorporated individual participant data (IPD) from trials with this available, alongside aggregate data (AD) from trials where it was not, in order to enable reliable subgroup analyses and inclusion of two key new outcomes. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Seventy-seven trials (40,249 women, and their babies) were included, although three trials (relating to 233 women) did not contribute data to the meta-analysis. Nine of the trials contributing data were large (> 1000 women recruited), accounting for 80% of women recruited. Although the trials took place in a wide range of countries, all of the nine large trials involved only women in high-income and/or upper middle-income countries. IPD were available for 36 trials (34,514 women), including all but one of the large trials. Low-dose aspirin alone was the intervention in all the large trials, and most trials overall. Dose in the large trials was 50 mg (1 trial, 1106 women), 60 mg (5 trials, 22,322 women), 75mg (1 trial, 3697 women) 100 mg (1 trial, 3294 women) and 150 mg (1 trial, 1776 women). Most studies were either low risk of bias or unclear risk of bias; and the large trials were all low risk of bas. Antiplatelet agents versus placebo/no treatment The use of antiplatelet agents reduced the risk of proteinuric pre-eclampsia by 18% (36,716 women, 60 trials, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.88; high-quality evidence), number needed to treat for one women to benefit (NNTB) 61 (95% CI 45 to 92). There was a small (9%) reduction in the RR for preterm birth <37 weeks (35,212 women, 47 trials; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.95, high-quality evidence), NNTB 61 (95% CI 42 to 114), and a 14% reduction infetal deaths, neonatal deaths or death before hospital discharge (35,391 babies, 52 trials; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.95; high-quality evidence), NNTB 197 (95% CI 115 to 681). Antiplatelet agents slightly reduced the risk of small-for-gestational age babies (35,761 babies, 50 trials; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.92; high-quality evidence), NNTB 146 (95% CI 90 to 386), and pregnancies with serious adverse outcome (a composite outcome including maternal death, baby death, pre-eclampsia, small-for-gestational age, and preterm birth) (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.96; 17,382 women; 13 trials, high-quality evidence), NNTB 54 (95% CI 34 to 132). Antiplatelet agents probably slightly increase postpartum haemorrhage > 500 mL (23,769 women, 19 trials; RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; moderate-quality evidence due to clinical heterogeneity), and they probably marginally increase the risk of placental abruption, although for this outcome the evidence was downgraded due to a wide confidence interval including the possibility of no effect (30,775 women; 29 trials; RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.54; moderate-quality evidence). Data from two large trials which assessed children at aged 18 months (including results from over 5000 children), did not identify clear differences in development between the two groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Administering low-dose aspirin to pregnant women led to small-to-moderate benefits, including reductions in pre-eclampsia (16 fewer per 1000 women treated), preterm birth (16 fewer per 1000 treated), the baby being born small-for-gestational age (seven fewer per 1000 treated) and fetal or neonatal death (five fewer per 1000 treated). Overall, administering antiplatelet agents to 1000 women led to 20 fewer pregnancies with serious adverse outcomes. The quality of evidence for all these outcomes was high. Aspirin probably slightly increased the risk of postpartum haemorrhage of more than 500 mL, however, the quality of evidence for this outcome was downgraded to moderate, due to concerns of clinical heterogeneity in measurements of blood loss. Antiplatelet agents probably marginally increase placental abruption, but the quality of the evidence was downgraded to moderate due to low event numbers and thus wide 95% CI. Overall, antiplatelet agents improved outcomes, and at these doses appear to be safe. Identifying women who are most likely to respond to low-dose aspirin would improve targeting of treatment. As almost all the women in this review were recruited to the trials after 12 weeks' gestation, it is unclear whether starting treatment before 12 weeks' would have additional benefits without any increase in adverse effects. While there was some indication that higher doses of aspirin would be more effective, further studies would be warranted to examine this.
Topics: Aspirin; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Small for Gestational Age; Maternal Mortality; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31684684
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004659.pub3 -
Systematic Reviews Oct 2023Antiplatelet agents are central in the management of vascular disease. The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for the management of thromboembolic complications... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Antiplatelet agents are central in the management of vascular disease. The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for the management of thromboembolic complications must be weighed against bleeding risk in the perioperative setting. This balance is critical in patients undergoing cardiac or non-cardiac surgery. The management of patients on DAPT for any indication (including stents) is not clear and there is limited evidence to guide decision-making. This review summarizes current evidence since 2015 regarding the occurrence of major adverse events associated with continuing, suspending, or varying DAPT in the perioperative period.
METHODS
A research librarian searched PubMed and Cochrane from November 30, 2015 to May 17, 2022, for relevant terms regarding adult patients on DAPT for any reason undergoing surgery, with a perioperative variation in DAPT strategy. Outcomes of interest included the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events, major adverse limb events, all-cause death, major bleeding, and reoperation. We considered withdrawal or discontinuation of DAPT as stopping either aspirin or a P2Y12 inhibitor or both agents; continuation of DAPT indicates that both drugs were given in the specified timeframe.
RESULTS
Eighteen observational studies met the inclusion criteria. No RCTs were identified, and no studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Twelve studies reported on CABG. Withholding DAPT therapy for more than 2 days was associated with less blood loss and a slight trend favoring less transfusion and surgical re-exploration. Among five observational CABG studies, there were no statistically significant differences in patient death across DAPT management strategies. Few studies reported cardiac outcomes. The remaining studies, which were about procedures other than exclusively CABG, demonstrated mixed findings with respect to DAPT strategy, bleeding, and ischemic outcomes.
CONCLUSION
The evidence base on the benefits and risks of different perioperative DAPT strategies for patients with stents is extremely limited. The strongest signal, which was still judged as low certainty evidence, is that suspension of DAPT for greater than 2 days prior to CABG surgery is associated with less bleeding, transfusions, and re-explorations. Different DAPT strategies' association with other outcomes of interest, such as MACE, remains uncertain.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
A preregistered protocol for this review can be found on the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of systematic reviews ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; registration number: CRD42022371032).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aspirin; Hemorrhage; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Stents; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 37838696
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02360-9 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2018To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual agent antiplatelet therapy combining clopidogrel and aspirin to prevent recurrent thrombotic and bleeding events compared... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual agent antiplatelet therapy combining clopidogrel and aspirin to prevent recurrent thrombotic and bleeding events compared with aspirin alone in patients with acute minor ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO website, PsycINFO, and grey literature up to 4 July 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS
Two reviewers independently screened potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria and assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A third team member reviewed all final decisions, and the team resolved disagreements through discussion. When reports omitted data that were considered important, clarification and additional information was sought from the authors. The analysis was conducted in RevMan 5.3 and MAGICapp based on GRADE methodology.
RESULTS
Three eligible trials involving 10 447 participants were identified. Compared with aspirin alone, dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin that was started within 24 hours of symptom onset reduced the risk of non-fatal recurrent stroke (relative risk 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.80, I=0%, absolute risk reduction 1.9%, high quality evidence), without apparent impact on all cause mortality (1.27, 0.73 to 2.23, I=0%, moderate quality evidence) but with a likely increase in moderate or severe extracranial bleeding (1.71, 0.92 to 3.20, I=32%, absolute risk increase 0.2%, moderate quality evidence). Most stroke events, and the separation in incidence curves between dual and single therapy arms, occurred within 10 days of randomisation; any benefit after 21 days is extremely unlikely.
CONCLUSIONS
Dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin given within 24 hours after high risk TIA or minor ischaemic stroke reduces subsequent stroke by about 20 in 1000 population, with a possible increase in moderate to severe bleeding of 2 per 1000 population. Discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy within 21 days, and possibly as early as 10 days, of initiation is likely to maximise benefit and minimise harms.
Topics: Aspirin; Brain Ischemia; Clopidogrel; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Mortality; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention; Severity of Illness Index; Stroke
PubMed: 30563866
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k5108 -
Stroke Jun 2021Antiplatelet therapy is key for preventing thrombotic events after transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. Although the role of aspirin is well established, there... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Antiplatelet therapy is key for preventing thrombotic events after transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. Although the role of aspirin is well established, there is emerging evidence for the role of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in preventing recurrent stroke.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and study-level meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of early initiation of short-term DAPT (aspirin+P2Y12 inhibitor for up to 3 months) versus aspirin alone in patients with acute stroke or transient ischemic attack. Primary efficacy outcome was risk of recurrent stroke and primary safety outcome was incidence of major bleeding. Secondary outcomes studied were risk of any ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause death. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and CIs were calculated using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Four trials with a total of 21 459 patients were included. As compared to aspirin alone, DAPT had a lower risk of recurrent stroke (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.68–0.83]; P<0.001; I2=0%) but a higher risk of major bleeding events (RR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.14–4.34], P=0.02, I2=46.5%). Patients receiving DAPT had a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69–0.84], P<0.001, I2=0%) and recurrent ischemic events (RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.67–0.82], P<0.001, I2=0%).
CONCLUSIONS
As compared to aspirin alone, short-term DAPT within 24 hours of high-risk transient ischemic attack or mild-moderate ischemic stroke reduces the risk of recurrent stroke at the expense of higher risk of major bleeding.
Topics: Aspirin; Dual Anti-Platelet Therapy; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Time-to-Treatment
PubMed: 33902301
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.033033 -
Neurological Sciences : Official... Dec 2022Antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage has a high mortality rate, and many factors can cause antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage. Until... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage has a high mortality rate, and many factors can cause antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage. Until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published.
AIM
We conducted a systematic review to identify risk factors of antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage.
METHOD
The protocol for this systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022311647). All studies written in English that met the inclusion criteria published before January 2022 were obtained from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Two researchers independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated the quality and evidence of the included studies. Risk factors for antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage were used as the outcome index of this review. Random or fixed-effect models were used in statistical methods. I statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Of 2844 citations, we included 6 studies in our analysis. For intracranial hemorrhage, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with race, low BMI, GCS, severe bleeding, headache or vomiting, cerebrovascular disease, lacunar small vessel disease, cardiovascular disease, blood sugar, blood pressure, CT-defined white matter hypodensity, antihypertensive drugs, and antiplatelet therapy. In addition, we found low-certainty evidence that there may be little to no association between risk of intracranial hemorrhage and age, sex, and dual antithrombotic treatment or anticoagulant. CT-defined white matter hypodensity is not included in most intracranial hemorrhage risk assessment models.
CONCLUSION
This study summarizes risk factors for antiplatelet drug-associated intracranial hemorrhage, which is significant in preventing intracranial hemorrhage.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Intracranial Hemorrhages; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Risk Factors
PubMed: 35982361
DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-06326-y -
Journal of Interventional Cardiac... Mar 2023In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable ischemic heart disease, recent guidelines recommend oral anticoagulant (OAC) monotherapy in preference to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Dual therapy with oral anticoagulation and single antiplatelet agent versus monotherapy with oral anticoagulation alone in patients with atrial fibrillation and stable ischemic heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable ischemic heart disease, recent guidelines recommend oral anticoagulant (OAC) monotherapy in preference to OAC + single antiplatelet agent (SAPT) dual therapy. However, these data are based on the results of only two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a relatively small group of patients. Thus, the safety and efficacy of this approach may be underpowered to detect a significant difference. We hypothesized that OAC monotherapy will have a reduced risk of bleeding, but similar all-cause mortality and ischemic outcomes as compared to dual therapy (OAC + SAPT).
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus was conducted. Safety outcomes included total bleeding, major bleeding, and others. Efficacy outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RCTs and observational studies were pooled separately (study design stratified meta-analysis). Subgroup analyses were performed for vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Pooled risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis of 2 RCTs comprising a total of 2905 patients showed that dual therapy (OAC + SAPT) vs. OAC monotherapy was associated with a statistically significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.51; 95% CI [1.10, 2.06]). There was no significant reduction in MACE (RR 1.10; [0.71, 1.72]), stroke (RR 1.29; [0.85, 1.95]), myocardial infarction (RR 0.57; [0.28, 1.16]), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.22; [0.63, 2.35]), or all-cause mortality (RR 1.18 [0.52, 2.68]). Meta-analysis of 20 observational studies comprising 47,451 patients showed that dual therapy (OAC + SAPT) vs. OAC monotherapy was associated with a statistically significant higher total bleeding (RR 1.50; [1.20, 1.88]), major bleeding (RR = 1.49; [1.38, 1.61]), gastrointestinal bleeding (RR = 1.62; [1.15, 2.28]), and myocardial infarction (RR = 1.15; [1.05, 1.26]), without significantly lower MACE (RR 1.10; [0.97, 1.24]), stroke (RR 0.93; [0.73, 1.19]), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.11; [0.95, 1.29]), or all-cause mortality (RR 0.93; [0.78, 1.11]). Subgroup analysis showed similar results for both vitamin K antagonists and DOACs, except a statistically significant higher intracranial bleeding with vitamin K antagonist + SAPT vs. vitamin K antagonist monotherapy (RR 1.89; [1.36-2.63]).
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with AF and stable ischemic heart disease, OAC + SAPT as compared to OAC monotherapy is associated with a significant increase in bleeding events without a significant reduction in thrombotic events, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Atrial Fibrillation; Treatment Outcome; Myocardial Ischemia; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Fibrinolytic Agents; Vitamin K; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 36085242
DOI: 10.1007/s10840-022-01347-1 -
Neurology May 2017To address whether to restart older patients on anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents in the setting of a chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To address whether to restart older patients on anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents in the setting of a chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH).
METHODS
This is an update of a previous review (searched until July 2012). Medline, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar, PLOS, and the Cochrane Register for Systematic Reviews databases were searched from January 2012 to December 2016. Studies included older adults (those over 65 years) experiencing traumatic subdural hematoma or cSDH who were on anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included (mean age 72 years). Four out of 7 studies provided combined data on anticoagulants or antiplatelet use. Only one study found anticoagulant or antiplatelet agent use to be a significant factor for cSDH rebleeding. Two studies considered anticoagulant use only and both reported similar increased odds of rebleeding (odds ratio [OR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-16.86; OR 2.7 95% CI 1.42-6.96). Antiplatelets were not found to be associated with rebleeding. Ideal timing to resume anticoagulants or antiplatelets was unclear.
CONCLUSIONS
Anticoagulant medication was associated with increased rebleeding risk in older adults with cSDH. However, antiplatelet medication was not associated with increased risk of rebleeding.
Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; Hematoma, Subdural, Chronic; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors
PubMed: 28411235
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000003918