-
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 -
American Journal of Cardiovascular... Mar 2024Chronic kidney disease is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspirin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Chronic kidney disease is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspirin administered for primary prevention of CVD in patients with chronic kidney disease.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL and Clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to 22 June 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies evaluating aspirin as primary prevention of CVD in chronic kidney disease were included. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Overall, 11 studies (6 RCTs and 5 cohort studies) with 24,352 patients were included. The meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that aspirin was associated with lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events [hazard ratio (HR): 0.79; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.64-0.97] and higher risk of major bleeding [risk ratio (RR): 1.35; 95% CI 1.15-1.58]. Incorporating observational evidence led to statistically non-significant findings in terms of risk of both cardiovascular events (pooled HR: 0.97; 95% CI 0.75-1.25; low certainty) and major bleeding (pooled RR: 1.21; 95% CI 0.99-1.48; moderate certainty). No statistically significant differences between aspirin and placebo were observed in the outcomes of mortality, coronary heart disease, stroke and renal events.
CONCLUSIONS
RCT evidence points to a possible benefit in cardiovascular event reduction from aspirin administration, at the cost of increased major bleeding risk. This finding was not confirmed when the existing observational evidence was incorporated. Further research should determine the most appropriate subpopulation of chronic kidney disease patients that would benefit the most from prophylactic aspirin therapy.
REGISTRATION
The study protocol has been prospectively registered and is publicly available from: https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.261ged63jv47/v1 .
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Diseases; Aspirin; Hemorrhage; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Primary Prevention
PubMed: 38296933
DOI: 10.1007/s40256-024-00630-y -
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases Jan 2024The aetiology of gastroschisis is considered multifactorial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether the use of medications during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aetiology of gastroschisis is considered multifactorial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether the use of medications during pregnancy, is associated with the risk of gastroschisis in offspring.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched from 1st January 1990 to 31st December 2020 to identify observational studies examining the association between medication use during pregnancy and the risk of gastroschisis. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used for the quality assessment of the individual studies. We pooled adjusted measures using a random-effect model to estimate relative risk [RR] and the 95% confidence interval [CI]. I statistic for heterogeneity and publication bias was calculated.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies providing data on 751,954 pregnancies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled RRs showed significant associations between aspirin (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16-2.38; I = 58.3%), oral contraceptives (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.21-1.92; I = 22.0%), pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.16-1.97; I = 33.2%), ibuprofen (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.26-1.60; I = 0.0%), and gastroschisis. No association was observed between paracetamol and gastroschisis (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.96-1.41; I = 39.4%).
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest that the exposure in the first trimester of pregnancy to over the counter medications (OTC) such as aspirin, ibuprofen, pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine as well as to oral contraceptives, was associated with an increased risk of gastroschisis. However, these associations are significant only in particular subgroups defined by geographic location, adjustment variables and type of control. Therefore, further research is needed to investigate them as potential risk factors for gastroschisis, to assess their safety in pregnancy and to develop treatment strategies to reduce the risk of gastroschisis in offspring. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021287529.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Aspirin; Contraceptives, Oral; Gastroschisis; Ibuprofen; Phenylpropanolamine; Pseudoephedrine; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38287353
DOI: 10.1186/s13023-023-02992-z -
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 -
American Journal of Health-system... Jun 2024Oral anticoagulants (OACs) and aspirin can trigger bleeding events when used alone or in combination. The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of any type of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Oral anticoagulants (OACs) and aspirin can trigger bleeding events when used alone or in combination. The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of any type of bleeding in individuals exposed to a combination of OAC and aspirin with the risk in those taking an OAC or aspirin alone.
METHODS
MEDLINE and Web of Science were queried in January 2021 for eligible articles. Studies were included if they were either randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies and evaluated the number of any bleeding events in two groups, one with exposure to both OAC and aspirin and one with exposure to OAC alone or aspirin alone. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies were included. In an analysis of 15 RCTs and 19 observational studies evaluating OAC plus aspirin versus OAC alone, a significant difference in the risk of bleeding was observed in the combination groups, with an odds ratio [OR] of, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.15-1.59) for RCTs and an OR of 1.42 (95% CI-, 1.09-1.87) for observational studies. When OAC plus aspirin was compared to aspirin alone, a higher rate of bleeding was found in the combination group (OR, 2.36; 95%CI, 1.91-2.92) in the analysis of 15 RCTs, but no significant difference was found among 10 observational studies (OR, 1.93; 95% Cl, 0.99-3.75).
CONCLUSION
The risk of any type of bleeding was significantly increased among patients taking aspirin plus OAC compared to those taking OAC alone in both RCTs and observational studies. Evaluation of RCTs comparing OAC plus aspirin to aspirin alone suggests increased bleeding risk as well.
Topics: Aspirin; Humans; Anticoagulants; Hemorrhage; Administration, Oral; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38263263
DOI: 10.1093/ajhp/zxae010 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Computed... 2024Coronary computed tomography angiogram (CCTA) is a crucial tool for diagnosing CAD, but its impact on altering preventive medications is not well-documented. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Coronary computed tomography angiogram (CCTA) is a crucial tool for diagnosing CAD, but its impact on altering preventive medications is not well-documented. This systematic review aimed to compare changes in aspirin and statin therapy following CCTA and functional stress testing in patients with suspected CAD, and in those underwent CCTA when stratified by the presence/absence of plaque.
RESULTS
Eight studies involving 42,812 CCTA patients and 64,118 cardiac stress testing patients were analyzed. Compared to functional testing, CCTA led to 66 % more changes in statin therapy (pooled RR, 95 % CI [1.28-2.15]) and a 74 % increase in aspirin prescriptions (pooled RR, 95 % CI [1.34-2.26]). For medication modifications based on CCTA results, 13 studies (47,112 patients with statin data) and 11 studies (12,089 patients with aspirin data) were included. Patients with any plaque on CCTA were five times more likely to use or intensify statins compared to those without CAD (pooled RR, 5.40, 95 % CI [4.16-7.00]). Significant heterogeneity remained, which decreased when stratified by diabetes rates. Aspirin use increased eightfold after plaque detection (pooled RR, 8.94 [95 % CI, 4.21-19.01]), especially with obstructive plaque findings (pooled RR, 9.41, 95 % CI [2.80-39.02]).
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, CCTA resulted in higher changes in statin and aspirin therapy compared to cardiac stress testing. Detection of plaque by CCTA significantly increased statin and aspirin therapy.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Angina Pectoris; Aspirin; Computed Tomography Angiography; Coronary Angiography; Coronary Artery Disease; Coronary Vessels; Exercise Test; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Plaque, Atherosclerotic; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Predictive Value of Tests; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38262852
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcct.2024.01.006 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jan 2024Resveratrol has long been proposed as being beneficial to human health across multiple morbidities, yet there is currently no conclusive clinical evidence to advocate... (Review)
Review
Resveratrol has long been proposed as being beneficial to human health across multiple morbidities, yet there is currently no conclusive clinical evidence to advocate its recommendation in any healthcare setting. A large cohort with high-quality clinical data and clearly defined biomarkers or endpoints are required to draw meaningful conclusions. This systematic review compiles every clinical trial conducted using a defined dose of resveratrol in a purified form across multiple morbidities to highlight the current 'state-of-play' and knowledge gaps, informing future trial designs to facilitate the realisation of resveratrol's potential benefits to human health. Over the last 20 years, there have been almost 200 studies evaluating resveratrol across at least 24 indications, including cancer, menopause symptoms, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disease. There are currently no consensus treatment regimens for any given condition or endpoint, beyond the fact that resveratrol is generally well-tolerated at a dose of up to 1 g/day. Additionally, resveratrol consistently reduces inflammatory markers and improves aspects of a dysregulated metabolism. In conclusion, over the last 20 years, the increasing weight of clinical evidence suggests resveratrol can benefit human health, but more large, high-quality clinical trials are required to transition this intriguing compound from health food shops to the clinic.
Topics: Female; Humans; Resveratrol; Cardiovascular Diseases; Consensus; Data Accuracy; Metabolic Syndrome
PubMed: 38255828
DOI: 10.3390/ijms25020747 -
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Mar 2024Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Low-dose aspirin (LDA) administration is associated with an elevated risk of recurring peptic ulcer (PU) and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage.
AIMS
This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively assess the effectiveness of diverse medications in preventing the recurrence of PU and GI hemorrhage in patients with a history of PU receiving long-term LDA therapy.
METHODS
This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023406550). We searched relevant studies in main databases from inception to March 2023. All statistical analyses were performed using R (version 4.1.3), with the "Gemtc" (version 1.0-1) package. The pooled risk ratio (RR), corresponding 95% credible interval (95% CrI), and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were calculated.
RESULTS
11 Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The analysis underscored pantoprazole was the most efficacious for reducing the risk of PU recurrence (RR [95% CrI] = 0.02 [0, 0.28]; SUCRA: 90.76%), followed by vonoprazan (RR [95% CrI] = 0.03 [0, 0.19]; SUCRA: 86.47%), comparing with the placebo group. Pantoprazole also performed well in preventing GI hemorrhage (RR [95% CrI] = 0.01[0, 0.42]; SUCRA: 87.12%) compared with Teprenone.
CONCLUSIONS
For patients with a history of PU receiving LDA, pantoprazole and vonoprazan might be the optimal choices to prevent PU recurrence and GI hemorrhage.
Topics: Humans; Pantoprazole; Peptic Ulcer; Aspirin; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Pyrroles; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 38252210
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-023-08233-4 -
BMJ Evidence-based Medicine May 2024To compare dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation with five alternative DAPT strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
De-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) de-escalation with five alternative DAPT strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
DESIGN
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Parallel-arm randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT strategies were included and arms of interest were compared via NMA. Partial ranking of each identified arm and for each investigated endpoint was also performed.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Adult patients with ACS (≥18 years) undergoing PCI with indications for DAPT.
SEARCH METHODS
A comprehensive search covered several databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, Conference Proceeding Citation Index-Science) from inception to 15 October 2023. Medical subject headings and keywords related to ACS, PCI and DAPT interventions were used. Reference lists of included studies were screened. Clinical trials registers were searched for ongoing or unpublished trials.
INTERVENTIONS
Six strategies were assessed: T1 arm: acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and prasugrel for 12 months; T2 arm: ASA and low-dose prasugrel for 12 months; T3 arm: ASA and ticagrelor for 12 months; T4 arm: DAPT de-escalation (ASA+P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-3 months, then single antiplatelet therapy with potent P2Y12 inhibitor or DAPT with clopidogrel); T5 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 12 months; T6 arm: ASA and clopidogrel for 3-6 months.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Primary outcome: Cardiovascular mortality.
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
bleeding events (all, major, minor), stent thrombosis (ST), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
RESULTS
23 RCTs (75 064 patients with ACS) were included. No differences in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause death, recurrent MI or MACE were found when the six strategies were compared, although with different levels of certainty of evidence. ASA and clopidogrel for 12 or 3-6 months may result in a large increase of ST risk versus ASA plus full-dose prasugrel (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.12, and OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.33 to 7.26, respectively; low certainty evidence for both comparisons). DAPT de-escalation probably results in a reduced risk of all bleedings compared with ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81, moderate-certainty evidence) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.75), while it may not increase the risk of ST. ASA plus 12-month clopidogrel may reduce all bleedings versus ASA plus full-dose 12-month prasugrel (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.94, low certainty) and ASA plus 12-month ticagrelor (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.89).
CONCLUSIONS
DAPT de-escalation and ASA-clopidogrel regimens may reduce bleeding events compared with 12 months ASA and potent P2Y12 inhibitors. 3-6 months or 12-month aspirin-clopidogrel may increase ST risk compared with 12-month aspirin plus potent P2Y12 inhibitors, while DAPT de-escalation probably does not.
Topics: Humans; Acute Coronary Syndrome; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; Dual Anti-Platelet Therapy; Aspirin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hemorrhage; Prasugrel Hydrochloride
PubMed: 38242567
DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112476