Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Drug-Eluting Stenting in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

IF 14.8 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Pedro E P Carvalho, Douglas M Gewehr, Bruno R Nascimento, Lara Melo, Giullia Burkhardt, André Rivera, Marcelo A P Braga, Patricia O Guimarães, Roxana Mehran, Stephan Windecker, Marco Valgimigli, Dominick J Angiolillo, Deepak L Bhatt, Yader Sandoval, Shao-Liang Chen, Gregg W Stone, Renato D Lopes
{"title":"Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Drug-Eluting Stenting in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Pedro E P Carvalho, Douglas M Gewehr, Bruno R Nascimento, Lara Melo, Giullia Burkhardt, André Rivera, Marcelo A P Braga, Patricia O Guimarães, Roxana Mehran, Stephan Windecker, Marco Valgimigli, Dominick J Angiolillo, Deepak L Bhatt, Yader Sandoval, Shao-Liang Chen, Gregg W Stone, Renato D Lopes","doi":"10.1001/jamacardio.2024.3216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains under debate.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze the efficacy and safety of DAPT strategies in patients with ACS using a bayesian network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases were searched from inception to April 8, 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT duration strategies in patients with ACS undergoing PCI were selected. Short-term strategies (1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors, 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors, 3 months of DAPT followed by aspirin, and 6 months of DAPT followed by aspirin) were compared with conventional 12 months of DAPT.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The risk ratio (RR) with a 95% credible interval (CrI) was calculated within a bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis. Treatments were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary efficacy end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE); the primary safety end point was major bleeding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 15 RCTs randomizing 35 326 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [11.1] years; 26 954 male [76.3%]; 11 339 STEMI [32.1%]) with ACS were included. A total of 24 797 patients (70.2%) received potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor or prasugrel). Compared with 12 months of DAPT, 1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors reduced major bleeding (RR, 0.47; 95% CrI, 0.26-0.74) with no difference in MACCE (RR, 1.00; 95% CrI, 0.70-1.41). No significant differences were observed in MACCE incidence between strategies, although CrIs were wide. SUCRA ranked 1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors as the best for reducing major bleeding and 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors as optimal for reducing MACCE (RR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.56-1.21).</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>Results of this systematic review and network meta-analysis reveal that, in patients with ACS undergoing PCI with DES, 1 month of DAPT followed by potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a reduction in major bleeding without increasing MACCE when compared with 12 months of DAPT. However, an increased risk of MACCE cannot be excluded, and 3 months of DAPT followed by potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was ranked as the best option to reduce MACCE. Because most patients receiving P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy were taking ticagrelor, the safety of stopping aspirin in those taking clopidogrel remains unclear.</p>","PeriodicalId":14657,"journal":{"name":"JAMA cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11581547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2024.3216","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains under debate.

Objectives: To analyze the efficacy and safety of DAPT strategies in patients with ACS using a bayesian network meta-analysis.

Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and LILACS databases were searched from inception to April 8, 2024.

Study selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT duration strategies in patients with ACS undergoing PCI were selected. Short-term strategies (1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors, 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors, 3 months of DAPT followed by aspirin, and 6 months of DAPT followed by aspirin) were compared with conventional 12 months of DAPT.

Data extraction and synthesis: This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. The risk ratio (RR) with a 95% credible interval (CrI) was calculated within a bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis. Treatments were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA).

Main outcomes and measures: The primary efficacy end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE); the primary safety end point was major bleeding.

Results: A total of 15 RCTs randomizing 35 326 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.1 [11.1] years; 26 954 male [76.3%]; 11 339 STEMI [32.1%]) with ACS were included. A total of 24 797 patients (70.2%) received potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor or prasugrel). Compared with 12 months of DAPT, 1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors reduced major bleeding (RR, 0.47; 95% CrI, 0.26-0.74) with no difference in MACCE (RR, 1.00; 95% CrI, 0.70-1.41). No significant differences were observed in MACCE incidence between strategies, although CrIs were wide. SUCRA ranked 1 month of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors as the best for reducing major bleeding and 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitors as optimal for reducing MACCE (RR, 0.85; 95% CrI, 0.56-1.21).

Conclusion and relevance: Results of this systematic review and network meta-analysis reveal that, in patients with ACS undergoing PCI with DES, 1 month of DAPT followed by potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a reduction in major bleeding without increasing MACCE when compared with 12 months of DAPT. However, an increased risk of MACCE cannot be excluded, and 3 months of DAPT followed by potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was ranked as the best option to reduce MACCE. Because most patients receiving P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy were taking ticagrelor, the safety of stopping aspirin in those taking clopidogrel remains unclear.

急性冠状动脉综合征患者接受药物洗脱支架术后的短期双联抗血小板疗法:系统综述与网络 Meta 分析》。
重要性:接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者接受双重抗血小板治疗(DAPT)的最佳时间仍存在争议:采用贝叶斯网络荟萃分析法分析 DAPT 策略对 ACS 患者的疗效和安全性:数据来源:检索了MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane和LILACS数据库,检索时间从开始到2024年4月8日:研究选择:对接受PCI治疗的ACS患者的DAPT持续时间策略进行比较的随机临床试验(RCT)。短期策略(DAPT 1 个月后使用 P2Y12 抑制剂、DAPT 3 个月后使用 P2Y12 抑制剂、DAPT 3 个月后使用阿司匹林、DAPT 6 个月后使用阿司匹林)与传统的 12 个月 DAPT 进行了比较:本系统综述和网络荟萃分析遵循《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》指南。在贝叶斯随机效应网络荟萃分析中计算了风险比 (RR) 和 95% 可信区间 (CrI)。主要结果和测量指标:主要疗效终点为主要心脑血管不良事件(MACCE);主要安全性终点为大出血:结果:共纳入了 15 项 RCT,随机抽取了 35 326 名 ACS 患者(平均 [SD] 年龄 63.1 [11.1] 岁;26 954 名男性 [76.3%];11 339 名 STEMI [32.1%])。共有 24 797 名患者(70.2%)接受了强效 P2Y12 抑制剂(替卡格雷或普拉格雷)治疗。与 12 个月的 DAPT 相比,1 个月的 DAPT 后使用 P2Y12 抑制剂可减少大出血(RR,0.47;95% CrI,0.26-0.74),但 MACCE 无差异(RR,1.00;95% CrI,0.70-1.41)。不同策略间的 MACCE 发生率无明显差异,但 CrIs 较大。SUCRA 将 1 个月的 DAPT 和 P2Y12 抑制剂列为减少大出血的最佳方案,将 3 个月的 DAPT 和 P2Y12 抑制剂列为减少 MACCE 的最佳方案(RR,0.85;95% CrI,0.56-1.21):本系统综述和网络荟萃分析的结果显示,在使用 DES 进行 PCI 的 ACS 患者中,与 12 个月的 DAPT 相比,1 个月的 DAPT 后使用强效 P2Y12 抑制剂单药治疗可减少大出血,但不会增加 MACCE。然而,不能排除 MACCE 风险增加的可能性,因此 3 个月 DAPT 后再接受强效 P2Y12 抑制剂单药治疗被列为减少 MACCE 的最佳选择。由于大多数接受 P2Y12 抑制剂单药治疗的患者都在服用替卡格雷,因此服用氯吡格雷的患者停用阿司匹林的安全性仍不明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA cardiology
JAMA cardiology Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
45.80
自引率
1.70%
发文量
264
期刊介绍: JAMA Cardiology, an international peer-reviewed journal, serves as the premier publication for clinical investigators, clinicians, and trainees in cardiovascular medicine worldwide. As a member of the JAMA Network, it aligns with a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications. Published online weekly, every Wednesday, and in 12 print/online issues annually, JAMA Cardiology attracts over 4.3 million annual article views and downloads. Research articles become freely accessible online 12 months post-publication without any author fees. Moreover, the online version is readily accessible to institutions in developing countries through the World Health Organization's HINARI program. Positioned at the intersection of clinical investigation, actionable clinical science, and clinical practice, JAMA Cardiology prioritizes traditional and evolving cardiovascular medicine, alongside evidence-based health policy. It places particular emphasis on health equity, especially when grounded in original science, as a top editorial priority.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信