-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Apr 2016To develop a practical evidence based list of clinical risk factors that can be assessed by a clinician at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation to estimate a woman's risk of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To develop a practical evidence based list of clinical risk factors that can be assessed by a clinician at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation to estimate a woman's risk of pre-eclampsia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase databases, 2000-15.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Cohort studies with ≥ 1000 participants that evaluated the risk of pre-eclampsia in relation to a common and generally accepted clinical risk factor assessed at ≤ 16 weeks' gestation.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two independent reviewers extracted data from included studies. A pooled event rate and pooled relative risk for pre-eclampsia were calculated for each of 14 risk factors.
RESULTS
There were 25,356,688 pregnancies among 92 studies. The pooled relative risk for each risk factor significantly exceeded 1.0, except for prior intrauterine growth restriction. Women with antiphospholipid antibody syndrome had the highest pooled rate of pre-eclampsia (17.3%, 95% confidence interval 6.8% to 31.4%). Those with prior pre-eclampsia had the greatest pooled relative risk (8.4, 7.1 to 9.9). Chronic hypertension ranked second, both in terms of its pooled rate (16.0%, 12.6% to 19.7%) and pooled relative risk (5.1, 4.0 to 6.5) of pre-eclampsia. Pregestational diabetes (pooled rate 11.0%, 8.4% to 13.8%; pooled relative risk 3.7, 3.1 to 4.3), prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) >30 (7.1%, 6.1% to 8.2%; 2.8, 2.6 to 3.1), and use of assisted reproductive technology (6.2%, 4.7% to 7.9%; 1.8, 1.6 to 2.1) were other prominent risk factors.
CONCLUSIONS
There are several practical clinical risk factors that, either alone or in combination, might identify women in early pregnancy who are at "high risk" of pre-eclampsia. These data can inform the generation of a clinical prediction model for pre-eclampsia and the use of aspirin prophylaxis in pregnancy.
Topics: Aspirin; Body Mass Index; Chronic Disease; Cohort Studies; Early Diagnosis; Female; Humans; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Pregnancy in Diabetics; Prenatal Diagnosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27094586
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i1753 -
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 Neurology Feb 2022Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel and aspirin is effective in preventing recurrent strokes after minor ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel and aspirin is effective in preventing recurrent strokes after minor ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). However, there is emerging evidence for the use of ticagrelor and aspirin, and the 2 DAPT regimens have not been compared directly.
OBJECTIVE
To compare ticagrelor and aspirin with clopidogrel and aspirin in patients with acute minor ischemic stroke or TIA in the prevention of recurrent strokes or death.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane from database inception until February 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials that enrolled adults with acute minor ischemic stroke or TIA and provided the mentioned interventions within 72 hours of symptom onset, with a minimum follow-up of 30 days.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
PRISMA guidelines for network meta-analyses were followed. Two reviewers independently extracted data and appraised risk of bias. Fixed-effects models were fit using a bayesian approach to network meta-analysis. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Surface under the cumulative rank curve plots were produced.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent stroke or death up to 90 days. Secondary outcomes include major bleeding, mortality, adverse events, and functional disability. A sensitivity analysis was performed at 30 days for the primary outcome.
RESULTS
A total of 4014 citations were screened; 5 randomized clinical trials were included. Data from 22 098 patients were analyzed, including 5517 in the clopidogrel and aspirin arm, 5859 in the ticagrelor and aspirin arm, and 10 722 in the aspirin arm. Both clopidogrel and aspirin (HR, 0.74; 95% CrI, 0.65-0.84) and ticagrelor and aspirin (HR, 0.79; 95% CrI, 0.68-0.91) were superior to aspirin in the prevention of recurrent stroke and death. There was no statistically significant difference between clopidogrel and aspirin compared with ticagrelor and aspirin (HR, 0.94; 95% CrI, 0.78-1.13). Both DAPT regimens had higher rates of major hemorrhage than aspirin alone. Clopidogrel and aspirin was associated with a decreased risk of functional disability compared with aspirin alone (HR, 0.82; 95% CrI, 0.74-0.91) and ticagrelor and aspirin (HR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.75-0.97).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
DAPT combining aspirin with either ticagrelor or clopidogrel was superior to aspirin alone, but there was no statistically significant difference found between the 2 regimens for the primary outcome.
Topics: Aspirin; Clopidogrel; Drug Therapy, Combination; Dual Anti-Platelet Therapy; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Ischemic Stroke; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Ticagrelor
PubMed: 34870698
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.4514 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... May 2018Impaired placentation in the first 16 weeks of pregnancy is associated with increased risk of subsequent development of preeclampsia, birth of small-for-gestational-age... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE DATA
Impaired placentation in the first 16 weeks of pregnancy is associated with increased risk of subsequent development of preeclampsia, birth of small-for-gestational-age neonates, and placental abruption. Previous studies reported that prophylactic use of aspirin reduces the risk of preeclampsia and small-for-gestational-age neonates with no significant effect on placental abruption. However, meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of aspirin in relation to gestational age at onset of therapy and dosage of the drug reported that significant reduction in the risk of preeclampsia and small-for-gestational-age neonates is achieved only if the onset of treatment is at ≤16 weeks of gestation and the daily dosage of the drug is ≥100 mg.
STUDY
We aimed to estimate the effect of aspirin on the risk of placental abruption or antepartum hemorrhage in relation to gestational age at onset of therapy and the dosage of the drug.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that evaluated the prophylactic effect of aspirin during pregnancy, we used PubMed, Cinhal, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library from 1985 to September 2017. Relative risks of placental abruption or antepartum hemorrhage with their 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the use of random effect models. Analyses were stratified according to daily dose of aspirin (<100 and ≥100 mg) and the gestational age at the onset of therapy (≤16 and >16 weeks of gestation) and compared with the use of subgroup difference analysis.
RESULTS
The entry criteria were fulfilled by 20 studies on a combined total of 12,585 participants. Aspirin at a dose of <100 mg per day had no impact on the risk of placental abruption or antepartum hemorrhage, irrespective of whether it was initiated at ≤16 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-2.36) or at >16 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-2.39). At ≥100 mg per day, aspirin was not associated with a significant change on the risk of placental abruption or antepartum hemorrhage, whether the treatment was initiated at ≤16 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.62, 95% confidence interval, 0.31-1.26), or at >16 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-5.06), but the difference between the subgroups was significant (P=.04).
CONCLUSION
Aspirin at a daily dose of ≥100 mg for prevention of preeclampsia that is initiated at ≤16 weeks of gestation, rather than >16 weeks, may decrease the risk of placental abruption or antepartum hemorrhage.
Topics: Abruptio Placentae; Aspirin; Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy
PubMed: 29305829
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.238 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Nov 2014Platelets play an important role in cardiovascular disease, and β-blockers are often prescribed for cardiovascular disease prevention. β-Blockers may directly affect... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
Platelets play an important role in cardiovascular disease, and β-blockers are often prescribed for cardiovascular disease prevention. β-Blockers may directly affect platelet aggregation, because β-adrenergic receptors are present on platelets. There is uncertainty about the existence and magnitude of an effect of β-blockers on platelet aggregation. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of β-blockers on platelet aggregation.
METHODS
MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until April 2014. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Type of β-blocker, population, treatment duration and platelet aggregation were extracted. Standardized mean differences were calculated for each study and pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We retrieved 31 studies (28 clinical trials and three observational studies). β-Blockers decreased platelet aggregation (standardized mean difference -0.54, 95% confidence interval -0.85 to -0.24, P < 0.0001). This corresponds to a reduction of 13% (95% confidence interval 8-17%). Nonselective lipophilic β-blockers decreased platelet aggregation more than selective nonlipophilic β-blockers.
CONCLUSIONS
Clinically used β-blockers significantly reduce platelet aggregation. Nonselective lipophilic β-blockers seem to reduce platelet aggregation more effectively than selective nonlipophilic β-blockers. These findings may help to explain why some β-blockers are more effective than others in preventing cardiovascular disease.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Cardiovascular Diseases; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Platelet Aggregation
PubMed: 24730697
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12404 -
Circulation Oct 2020The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents remains uncertain. We compared short-term... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents remains uncertain. We compared short-term (<6-month) DAPT followed by aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy; midterm (6-month) DAPT; 12-month DAPT; and extended-term (>12-month) DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.
METHODS
Twenty-four randomized, controlled trials were selected using Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and online databases through September 2019. The coprimary end points were myocardial infarction and major bleeding, which constituted the net clinical benefit. A frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model.
RESULTS
In 79 073 patients, at a median follow-up of 18 months, extended-term DAPT was associated with a reduced risk of myocardial infarction in comparison with 12-month DAPT (absolute risk difference, -3.8 incident cases per 1000 person-years; relative risk, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.54-0.87]), midterm DAPT (absolute risk difference, -4.6 incident cases per 1000 person-years; relative risk, 0.61 [0.45-0.83]), and short-term DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy (absolute risk difference, -6.1 incident cases per 1000 person-years; relative risk, 0.55 [0.37-0.83]), or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (absolute risk difference, -3.7 incident cases per 1000 person-years; relative risk, 0.69 [0.51-0.95]). Conversely, extended-term DAPT was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding than all other DAPT groups. In comparison with 12-month DAPT, no significant differences in the risks of ischemic end points or major bleeding were observed with midterm or short-term DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy, with the exception that short-term DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding. There were no significant differences with respect to mortality between the different DAPT strategies. In acute coronary syndrome, extended-term in comparison with 12-month DAPT was associated with a reduced risk of myocardial infarction without a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS
The present network meta-analysis suggests that, in comparison with 12-month DAPT, short-term DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy reduces major bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents, whereas extended-term DAPT reduces myocardial infarction at the expense of more bleeding events.
Topics: Acute Coronary Syndrome; Aspirin; Drug-Eluting Stents; Humans; Incidence; Myocardial Infarction; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32795096
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.046308 -
Stroke and Vascular Neurology Oct 2022Antiplatelet therapy is one of the mainstays for secondary stroke prevention. This narrative review aimed to highlight the current evidence and recommendations of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antiplatelet therapy is one of the mainstays for secondary stroke prevention. This narrative review aimed to highlight the current evidence and recommendations of antiplatelet therapy for stroke prevention.We conducted advanced literature search for antiplatelet therapy. Landmark studies and randomised controlled trials evaluating antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention are reviewed. Results from Cochrane systematic review, pooled data analysis and meta-analysis are discussed.Single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) with aspirin, aspirin/extended-release dipyridamole or clopidogrel reduces the risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke in patients with non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 21-30 days is more effective than SAPT in patients with minor acute noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke or high-risk TIA. Prolonged use of DAPT is associated with higher risk of haemorrhage without reduction in stroke recurrence than SAPT. Compared with placebo, aspirin reduces the relative risk of recurrent stroke by approximately 22%. Aspirin/dipyridamole and cilostazol are superior to aspirin but associated with significant side effects. Cilostazol or ticagrelor might be more effective than aspirin or clopidogrel in patients with intracranial stenosis.SAPT is indicated for secondary stroke prevention in patients with non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA. DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 21-30 days followed by SAPT is recommended for patients with minor acute noncardioembolic stroke or high-risk TIA. Selection of appropriate antiplatelet therapy should also be based on compliance, drug tolerance or resistance.
Topics: Humans; Aspirin; Brain Ischemia; Cilostazol; Clopidogrel; Dipyridamole; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Ischemic Stroke; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Stroke; Ticagrelor
PubMed: 35393359
DOI: 10.1136/svn-2021-001166 -
Drugs Aug 2022High-quality evidence from trials directly comparing single antiplatelet therapies in symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to dual antiplatelet therapies or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
High-quality evidence from trials directly comparing single antiplatelet therapies in symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to dual antiplatelet therapies or acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) plus low-dose rivaroxaban is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis on the effectiveness of all antithrombotic regimens studied in PAD.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleedings. Secondary endpoints were major adverse limb events (MALE) and acute limb ischaemia (ALI). For each outcome, a frequentist network meta-analysis was used to compare relative risks (RRs) between medication and ASA. ASA was the universal comparator since a majority of studies used ASA as in the reference group.
RESULTS
Twenty-four randomized controlled trials were identified including 48,759 patients. With regard to reducing MACE, clopidogrel [RR 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.93], ticagrelor (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97), ASA plus ticagrelor (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.97), and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.93) were more effective than ASA, and equally effective to one another. As compared to ASA, major bleedings occurred more frequently with vitamin K antagonists, rivaroxaban, ASA plus vitamin K antagonists, and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban. All regimens were similar to ASA concerning MALE, while ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban was more effective in preventing ALI (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.80). Subgroup analysis in patients undergoing peripheral revascularization revealed that ≥ 3 months after intervention, evidence of benefit regarding clopidogrel, ticagrelor, and ASA plus ticagrelor was lacking, while ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban was more effective in preventing MACE (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97) and MALE (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.97) compared to ASA. ASA plus clopidogrel was not superior to ASA in preventing MACE ≥ 3 months after revascularization. Evidence regarding antithrombotic treatment strategies within 3 months after a peripheral intervention was lacking.
CONCLUSION
Clopidogrel, ticagrelor, ASA plus ticagrelor, and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban are superior to ASA monotherapy and equally effective to one another in preventing MACE in PAD. Of these four therapies, only ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban provides a higher risk of major bleedings. More than 3 months after peripheral vascular intervention, ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban is superior in preventing MACE and MALE compared to ASA but again at the cost of a higher risk of bleeding, while other treatment regimens show non-superiority. Based on the current evidence, clopidogrel may be considered the antithrombotic therapy of choice for most PAD patients, while in patients who underwent a peripheral vascular intervention, ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban could be considered for the long-term (> 3 months) prevention of MACE and MALE.
Topics: Aspirin; Clopidogrel; Fibrinolytic Agents; Hemorrhage; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Rivaroxaban; Ticagrelor; Vitamin K
PubMed: 35997941
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-022-01756-6 -
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 -
Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2019Though combination of clopidogrel added to aspirin has been compared to aspirin alone in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack, limited data exists on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Though combination of clopidogrel added to aspirin has been compared to aspirin alone in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack, limited data exists on the relative efficacy and safety between clopidogrel and aspirin monotherapy in patients with a recent ischemic stroke. We aimed to compare clopidogrel versus aspirin monotherapy in this population.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception to May 2018 to identify clinical trials and observational studies comparing clopidogrel versus aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with recent ischemic stroke within 12 months. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random effects model and were reported as risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Five studies meeting eligibility criteria were included in the analysis. A total of 29,357 adult patients who had recent ischemic stroke received either clopidogrel ( = 14, 293) or aspirin ( = 15, 064) for secondary prevention. Pairwise meta-analysis showed a statistically significant risk reduction in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (risk ratio 0.72 [95% CI, 0.53-0.97]), any ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke (0.76 [0.58, 0.99), and recurrent ischemic stroke (0.72 [0.55, 0.94]) in patients who received clopidogrel versus aspirin. The risk of bleeding was also lower for clopidogrel versus aspirin (0.57 [0.45, 0.74]). There was no difference in the rate of all-cause mortality between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis showed lower risks of major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, recurrent stroke, and bleeding events for clopidogrel monotherapy compared to aspirin. These findings support clinical benefit for single antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel over aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with recent ischemic stroke.
Topics: Aspirin; Brain Ischemia; Clopidogrel; Hemorrhage; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Recurrence; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Secondary Prevention; Stroke; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31867054
DOI: 10.1155/2019/1607181