-
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology Mar 2017New P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists have been used in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with different results. This systematic review... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
AIMS
New P2Y12 adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists have been used in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with different results. This systematic review analyzed and compared the evidence from large, clinical trials regarding the efficacy of clopidogrel relative to that of cangrelor, prasugrel, and ticagrelor in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with ACS.
METHODS AND RESULTS
This analysis compared newer P2Y12 inhibitors with clopidogrel of 13 clinical trials involved a total of 87,985 patients with ACS. The newer P2Y12 inhibitors include cangrelor, prasugrel, and ticagrelor. Newer P2Y12 inhibitors significantly decreased the risk of myocardial infarction and showed a trend toward reduction of cardiovascular death (odds ratio [OR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.96, and I = 54%, P < 0.05); (OR = 0.85, 95% CI, 0.77-0.93, and I = 42%, P < 0.001). The rates of stroke events and the incidence in patients with ACS did not differ statistically between the clopidogrel group and the group with newer P2Y12 inhibitors (OR = 0.95, 95% CI, 0.79-1.14, and I = 0%, P = 0.57). However, newer P2Y12 inhibitors showed a significant increase in thrombosis in MI major or minor bleeding (OR = 1.21, 95% CI, 1.03-1.42, and I = 56%, P = 0.02) compared with clopidogrel.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on this meta-analysis, newer P2Y12 inhibitors were significantly more effective than clopidogrel in the events of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death in patients with ACS, although the incidence of thrombosis in MI-defined bleeding was higher compared with clopidogrel.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Clopidogrel; Humans; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ticlopidine
PubMed: 27922911
DOI: 10.1097/FJC.0000000000000451 -
PloS One 2016To assess the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for the treatment of aspirin resistance (AR). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for the treatment of aspirin resistance (AR).
METHODS
A comprehensive research of seven electronic databases was performed for comparative studies evaluating CHM for AR. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the included trials using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data wasere synthesized by using RevMan 5.3 software. (PROSPERO Registration #CRD42015020182).
RESULTS
18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,460 patients were included. 15 RCTs reported significant difference in the reduction of platelet aggregation rate (PAR) induced by adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (P<0.05), and 11 reported significant effect of CHM plus aspirin to reduce PAR induced by arachidonic acid (AA) (P<0.05) compared with aspirin 100mg/d treatment. The pooling data of 3 RCTs showed the thromboxane B2 (TXB2) in patients with CHM plus aspirin versus aspirin were significantly reduced (Random Effect model (RE), Standard Deviation (SD) = -95.93, 95% Confidential Interval (CI)[-118.25,-73.61], P<0.00001). Subgroup analysis showed that TXB2 (Fixed Effect model (FE), SD = -89.23, 95%CI[-121.96,-56.49], P<0.00001) had significant difference in Tongxinluo capsule plus aspirin versus aspirin. 2 RCTs reported the clinical effective rate, and the meta-analysis result showed a significant difference in intervention and control group (FE, Relative Risk (RR) = 1.67, 95%CI[1.15, 2.42], P = 0.007<0.05). In 4 trials, CHM plus aspirin had better effects of reducing the reoccurrence of cerebral infarction than aspirin (FE, RR = 0.24, 95%CI [0.11, 0.49], P<0.0001). And one trial showed that CHM plus aspirin could decrease the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NHISS) score (P<0.05) and increase the Barthel Index (BI) score (P<0.05). 4 trials stated that there were no adverse effects occurred in intervention group, and analysis showed significant difference of CHM or CHM plus aspirin in reducing the occurrence of adverse events (FE, RR = 0.22, 95%CI[0.13, 0.39], P<0.00001). 5 trials claimed that the CHM monotherapy and CHM adjunctive therapy for AR did not add the risk of bleeding (FE, RR = 0.50, 95%CI[0.20, 1.22], P = 0.13>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
CHM may be effective and safe as an alternative and collaborative therapy for AR. However, the current evidence and potential promising findings should be interpreted with caution due to poor and varying methodological quality of included studies and the heterogeneity of interventions. Thus, further exploration of this strategy with adequately powered RCTs is warranted.
Topics: Aspirin; Drug Resistance; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Humans; Observer Variation
PubMed: 27153119
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154897