-
The American Journal of Cardiology Apr 2024Clinical practice guidelines from the American Heart Association recommend consideration of prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent left ventricular thrombus (LVT)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Clinical practice guidelines from the American Heart Association recommend consideration of prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent left ventricular thrombus (LVT) formation in patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction. These guidelines were given a low certainty of evidence (class IIb, level C), relying primarily on case studies and expert consensus to inform practice. Our objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulation, in addition to dual antiplatelet therapy, in the current era of timely primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Electronic databases, including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library, were systematically searched from January 2012 through June 2022. A total of 7,378 publications were screened, and 5 publications were eventually included in this review: 1 randomized control trial and 4 retrospective studies involving 1,461 patients. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects model and reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome of interest was the rate of LVT formation, and the secondary outcomes were the rate of major bleeding and systemic embolism. Pooled analysis showed a significantly lower rate of LVT formation (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.73, p <0.01) and significantly higher rates of bleeding (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.24, p = 0.03) in the triple therapy group compared with dual antiplatelet therapy. No significant difference was observed in the rate of systemic embolism between the groups (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.13, p = 0.08). In this meta-analysis, there is no conclusive evidence to either support or oppose the use of triple therapy for LVT prevention in patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Appropriately powered randomized controlled trials are warranted to further evaluate the benefits of LVT prevention against the risks of major bleeding in this population.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; Retrospective Studies; Myocardial Infarction; Thrombosis; Hemorrhage; Embolism; Anticoagulants; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38412882
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.02.023 -
PloS One 2024The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Can the combination of antiplatelet or alteplase thrombolytic therapy with argatroban benefit patients suffering from acute stroke? a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.
BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of administering argatroban as a treatment approach following antiplatelet therapy or alteplase thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute stroke is presently uncertain. However, it is important to highlight the potential benefits of combining this medication with known thrombolytics or antiplatelet therapy. One notable advantage of argatroban is its short half-life, which helps minimize excessive anticoagulation and risk of bleeding complications in inadvertent cases of hemorrhagic stroke. By conducting a meticulous review and meta-analysis, we aim to further explore the common use of argatroban and examine the plausible advantages of combining this medication with established thrombolytic and antiplatelet therapies.
METHOD
In this study, we performed a rigorous and methodical search for both randomized controlled trials and retrospective analyses. Our main objective was to analyze the impact of argatroban on the occurrence of hemorrhagic events and the mRS scores of 0-2. We utilized a meta-analysis to assess the relative risk (RR) associated with using argatroban versus not using it.
RESULTS
In this study, we analyzed data from 11 different studies, encompassing a total of 8,635 patients. Out of these patients, 3999(46.3%) received argatroban treatment while the remaining 4636(53.7%)did not. The primary outcome of 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale (mRS) score≤2) showed that the risk ratio (RR) for patients using argatroban after alteplase thrombolytic therapy compared to those not using argatroban was(RR, 1.00 ([95% CI, 0.92-1.09]; P = 0.97), indicating no statistical significance. However, for patients using argatroban after antiplatelet therapy, was (RR,1.09 [95% CI, 1.04-1.14]; P = 0.0001), which was statistically significant. In terms of hemorrhagic events, the RR for patients using argatroban compared to those not using argatroban was (RR,1.08 [95% CI, 0.88-1.33]; P = 0.46), indicating no statistical significance.
CONCLUSION
The results of this study suggest that further research into combination therapy with argatroban and antiplatelet agents may be warranted, however more rigorous RCTs are needed to definitively evaluate the effects of combination treatment.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Tissue Plasminogen Activator; Retrospective Studies; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Fibrinolytic Agents; Thrombolytic Therapy; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arginine; Pipecolic Acids; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38412157
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298226 -
European Stroke Journal Mar 2024A quarter of ischaemic strokes are lacunar subtype, typically neurologically mild, usually resulting from intrinsic cerebral small vessel pathology, with risk factor...
A quarter of ischaemic strokes are lacunar subtype, typically neurologically mild, usually resulting from intrinsic cerebral small vessel pathology, with risk factor profiles and outcome rates differing from other stroke subtypes. This European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with clinical decisions about management of lacunar ischaemic stroke to prevent adverse clinical outcomes. The guideline was developed according to ESO standard operating procedures and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. We addressed acute treatment (including progressive lacunar stroke) and secondary prevention in lacunar ischaemic stroke, and prioritised the interventions of thrombolysis, antiplatelet drugs, blood pressure lowering, lipid lowering, lifestyle, and other interventions and their potential effects on the clinical outcomes recurrent stroke, dependency, major adverse cardiovascular events, death, cognitive decline, mobility, gait, or mood disorders. We systematically reviewed the literature, assessed the evidence and where feasible formulated evidence-based recommendations, and expert concensus statements. We found little direct evidence, mostly of low quality. We recommend that patients with suspected acute lacunar ischaemic stroke receive intravenous alteplase, antiplatelet drugs and avoid blood pressure lowering according to current acute ischaemic stroke guidelines. For secondary prevention, we recommend single antiplatelet treatment long-term, blood pressure control, and lipid lowering according to current guidelines. We recommend smoking cessation, regular exercise, other healthy lifestyle modifications, and avoid obesity for general health benefits. We cannot make any recommendation concerning progressive stroke or other drugs. Large randomised controlled trials with clinically important endpoints, including cognitive endpoints, are a priority for lacunar ischaemic stroke.
Topics: Humans; Brain Ischemia; Cerebral Small Vessel Diseases; Lipids; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Stroke; Stroke, Lacunar
PubMed: 38380638
DOI: 10.1177/23969873231219416 -
PloS One 2024Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may predispose patients to thrombotic disease in the venous and arterial circulations. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may predispose patients to thrombotic disease in the venous and arterial circulations.
METHODS
Based on the current debate on antiplatelet therapy in COVID-19 patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of antiplatelet treatments. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science on February 1, 2023, and only included Randomized clinical trials. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and used Random-effects models to estimate the pooled percentage and its 95% CI.
RESULTS
Five unique eligible studies were included, covering 17,950 patients with COVID-19. The result showed no statistically significant difference in the relative risk of all-cause death in antiplatelet therapy versus non-antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.83-1.05, P = 0.26, I2 = 32%). Compared to no antiplatelet therapy, patients who received antiplatelet therapy had a significantly increased relative risk of major bleeding (RR 1.81, 95%CI 1.09-3.00, P = 0.02, I2 = 16%). The sequential analysis suggests that more RCTs are needed to draw more accurate conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the use of antiplatelet agents exhibited no significant benefit on all-cause death, and the upper bound of the confidence interval on all-cause death (RR 95% CI, 0.83-1.05) suggested that it was unlikely to be a substantiated harm risk associated with this treatment. However, evidence from all RCTs suggested a high risk of major bleeding in antiplatelet agent treatments.
CONCLUSION
According to the results of our sequential analysis, there is not enough evidence available to support or negate the use of antiplatelet agents in COVID-19 cases. The results of ongoing and future well-designed, large, randomized clinical trials are needed.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; COVID-19; Hemorrhage; Thrombosis
PubMed: 38300975
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297628 -
Research and Practice in Thrombosis and... Jan 2024The effects of antiplatelet therapy on menstrual bleeding have not been well characterized.
BACKGROUND
The effects of antiplatelet therapy on menstrual bleeding have not been well characterized.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review the effects of antiplatelet therapy on menstrual bleeding.
METHODS
A literature search was performed for studies of reproductive-aged women who received antiplatelet therapy. Characteristics of menstrual bleeding both before and after initiation of antiplatelet therapy and from comparison groups were collected. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias in individual studies.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies with a total of 611 women who received antiplatelet therapy were included. Types of antiplatelet drugs used were aspirin ( = 8), aspirin and/or clopidogrel ( = 2), prasugrel ( = 1), and not specified ( = 2). Risk of bias was assessed at moderate ( = 1), serious ( = 8), critical ( = 2), and no information ( = 2). Three studies reported changes in menstrual blood loss volume. One of these showed no increase during antiplatelet therapy; the other 2 studies suggested that aspirin may increase menstrual blood loss volume. In 3 studies that assessed the duration of menstrual bleeding, up to 13% of women reported an increased duration of menstruation. In 5 studies that reported the intensity of menstrual flow, 13% to 38% of women experienced an increase in the intensity of flow. Five studies reported the prevalence of heavy menstrual bleeding in women who received antiplatelet therapy, with estimates ranging from 7% to 38%.
CONCLUSION
There is lack of high-quality data on the effects of antiplatelet therapy on menstrual bleeding. Aspirin may increase menstrual blood loss, at least in a minority of women, whereas the effects of P2Y12 inhibitors are unknown.
PubMed: 38268520
DOI: 10.1016/j.rpth.2023.102295 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to prevent ischaemic cardiovascular events is promising, but the evidence remains limited.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in addition to background antiplatelet therapy, compared with placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in people without an indication for anticoagulation (i.e. atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and two clinical trial registers in September 2022 with no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of included studies for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs plus antiplatelet therapy versus placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, in people without an indication for anticoagulation after an AMI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects pairwise analyses using Review Manager Web, and network meta-analysis using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0-to-1 scale.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified seven eligible RCTs, including an ongoing trial that we could not include in the analysis. Of the six RCTs involving 33,039 participants, three RCTs compared rivaroxaban with placebo, two RCTs compared apixaban with placebo, and one RCT compared dabigatran with placebo. All participants in the six RCTs received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. The available evidence suggests that rivaroxaban compared with placebo reduces the rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.98; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty) and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01; NNTB 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; moderate certainty). There is probably little or no difference between apixaban and placebo in all-cause mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.35; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 334; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.27; number needed to treat not applicable; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty). Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; NNTB 63; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Dabigatran compared with placebo may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, although the point estimate suggests benefit (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.52; NNTB 143; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Two of the investigated NOACs were associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared to placebo: apixaban (RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.06; NNTH 143; 2 studies, 8544 participants; high certainty) and rivaroxaban (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.12 to 9.77; NNTH 125; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty). There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.22 to 14.12; NNTH 500; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). The results of the network meta-analysis were inconclusive between the different NOACs at all individual doses for all primary outcomes. However, low-certainty evidence suggests that apixaban (combined dose) may be less effective than rivaroxaban and dabigatran for preventing all-cause mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduces all-cause mortality and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality and may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality. There is probably no meaningful difference in the rate of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between apixaban and placebo. Moreover, we found no meaningful benefit in efficacy outcomes for specific therapy doses of any investigated NOACs following AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Evidence from the included studies suggests that rivaroxaban and apixaban increase the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo. There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding. Network meta-analysis did not show any superiority of one NOAC over another for our prespecified primary outcomes. Although the evidence suggests that NOACs reduce mortality, the effect size or impact is small; moreover, NOACs may increase major bleeding. Head-to-head trials, comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more solid evidence.
Topics: Humans; Dabigatran; Rivaroxaban; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage
PubMed: 38264795
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014678.pub2 -
Medicine Dec 2023A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to explore the efficacy and safety of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation drugs in chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to explore the efficacy and safety of different antiplatelet or anticoagulation drugs in chronic coronary syndromes patients.
METHODS
Electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases) were systematically searched to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating different antiplatelet or anticoagulation drugs (aspirin, aspirin + clopidogrel, aspirin + clopidogrel + cilostazol, clopidogrel/prasugrel + aspirin, aspirin + rivaoxaban 2.5 mg, aspirin + ticagrelor 60 mg, aspirin + ticagrelor 90 mg, clopidogrel or rivroxaban 5 mg) versus placebo for treatment chronic coronary syndromes patients. Outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events, all cause death, major bleeding and myocardial infarction. A random-effect Bayesian NMA was conducted for outcomes of interest, and results were presented as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals. The NMA was performed using R Software with a GeMTC package. A Bayesian NMA was performed and relative ranking of agents was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities.
RESULTS
Ten randomized controlled trials met criteria for inclusion and finally included in this NMA. In head-to-head comparison, no significant difference was observed between all antithrombotic treatment strategies with respect to primary endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events. In head-to-head comparison, no significant difference was observed between all antithrombotic treatment strategies with respect to all cause death. Clopidogrel/prasugrel + aspirin (OR = 3.8, 95% credible intervals [CrI]: 1.3-12.0, P < .05) and aspirin + rivaroxaban 2.5 mg (OR = 3.1, 95%CrI: 1.1-9.5, P < .05) was associated with an increase of the major bleeding. Compared with aspirin alone, aspirin + clopidogrel (OR = 0.42, 95%CrI: 0.22-0.76, P < .05) and aspirin + ticagrelor 90 mg (OR = 0.42, 95%CrI: 0.17-0.95, P < .05) was associated with a decrease of the myocardial infarction.
CONCLUSIONS
Myocardial infarction was significantly lower when adding clopidogrel or ticagrelor 90 mg to aspirin than those in the aspirin alone group. However, clopidogrel/prasugrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg was associated with an increase of the major bleeding than aspirin alone.
Topics: Humans; Clopidogrel; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Ticagrelor; Prasugrel Hydrochloride; Rivaroxaban; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Fibrinolytic Agents; Aspirin; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage; Anticoagulants; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38050293
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036429 -
Medicine Nov 2023Recent studies have highlighted the unfavorable prognosis of patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) who have received prior antiplatelet therapy (PAP).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recent studies have highlighted the unfavorable prognosis of patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) who have received prior antiplatelet therapy (PAP). Platelet infusion therapy (PIT) is commonly administered to such patients at many medical institutions, but its efficacy remains a subject of debate.
METHODS
To address this uncertainty, we conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for eligible studies published before June 30, 2023. Our primary outcomes of interest were favorable functional outcome and mortality, while secondary outcomes included the incidence of hematoma expansion and adverse events associated with PIT. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.
RESULTS
Our analysis included 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 6 retrospective studies, involving a total of 577 patients. Pooled analysis revealed that PIT did not contribute to a better favorable functional outcome at the 3-month follow-up (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89) among ICH patients with PAP. Furthermore, PIT did not significantly reduce the risk of mortality (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.40-1.55) or hematoma expansion (OR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.65-2.01). Notably, no significant differences in serious adverse events were observed between patients who underwent PIT and those who did not.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the available evidence, there is no indication that PIT can enhance the prognosis of spontaneous ICH patients with prior antiplatelet therapy, although this treatment approach appears to be safe. Therefore, routine recommendation of PIT for ICH patients with prior antiplatelet therapy is not warranted.
Topics: Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Platelet Transfusion; Cerebral Hemorrhage; Prognosis; Hematoma; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37986382
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036072 -
The Journal of Arthroplasty May 2024The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of early surgery in hip fracture patients who took clopidogrel and/or aspirin. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of early surgery in hip fracture patients who took clopidogrel and/or aspirin.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted using databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies relating to early arthroplasty or internal fixation for femoral neck fractures, intertrochanteric fractures, and subtrochanteric fractures in patients taking clopidogrel and/or aspirin. A total of 20 observational studies involving 3,077 patients were included in this meta-analysis, and analyzed in groups of early surgery versus delayed surgery, and clopidogrel and/or aspirin versus nonantiplatelet agents.
RESULTS
Patients in the clopidogrel and/or aspirin group who underwent early surgery had significantly more intraoperative blood loss than those in the non-antiplatelet group (mean difference = 17.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] [4.37, 31.55], P = .01), and patients in the clopidogrel and/or aspirin group had a lower overall incidence of complications after early surgery than those in the delayed surgery group (odds ratio = 0.26, 95% CI [0.14, 0.29], P < .001) and a shorter length of hospital stay (odds ratio = 0.26, 95% CI [0.14, 0.29], P < .001). There was no significant difference in postoperative mortality and other related indicators.
CONCLUSIONS
Early surgery in hip fracture patients taking clopidogrel and/or aspirin appears to be safe based on the available evidence and needs to be clarified by higher quality studies. However, the increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with discontinuation of clopidogrel or clopidogrel combined with aspirin dual antiplatelet therapy requires attention in the perioperative period.
Topics: Humans; Clopidogrel; Aspirin; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Hip Fractures; Femoral Neck Fractures; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37972664
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2023.11.012 -
Open Heart Nov 2023Clopidogrel is a P2Y inhibitor that has become a mainstay treatment following percutaneous intervention with drug-eluting stent placement to decrease restenosis and its...
INTRODUCTION
Clopidogrel is a P2Y inhibitor that has become a mainstay treatment following percutaneous intervention with drug-eluting stent placement to decrease restenosis and its potential complications, including sudden cardiac death and ischaemic strokes in patients with significant vascular disease.
AREAS COVERED
As a prodrug, the metabolism and efficacy of clopidogrel are contingent on the presence of wild-type CYP450 (CYP2C19) alleles. Genetic polymorphisms and variants are well known to impair its ability to prevent major adverse cardiovascular events in these patients, with inadequate response rates as high as 30% in previous publications. Patterns of allelic frequencies are expected to exhibit similarities between individuals of the same ancestry, ethnic group or geographic region. Accordingly, we seek to further elucidate worldwide prevalence rates for genetic polymorphisms in the CYP2C19-dependent metabolism of clopidogrel and review the potential of personalised CYP2C19 genotyping in clinical practice to mitigate this high treatment resistance and its associated burden on patients.
EXPERTS' COMMENTARY
Our findings support the consideration of genotyping before initiation of therapy to guide adequate dosage or substitutions of other P2Y inhibitors to promote personalised, precision medicine and to prevent adverse events when these therapies may inevitably fail in patients with variants of the CYP450 (CYP2C19) system.
Topics: Humans; Clopidogrel; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19; Drug-Eluting Stents; Polymorphism, Genetic
PubMed: 37963685
DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2023-002436