Long-term (12 months) vs. short-term (<12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy post-percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: a critical appraisal and systematic review.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Coronary artery disease Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-29 DOI:10.1097/MCA.0000000000001483
Kolten Abbott, Nicholas Seton, Gurjeevan Kaur, Jilai Zhao, Mark Jones, Kuljit Singh
{"title":"Long-term (12 months) vs. short-term (<12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy post-percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: a critical appraisal and systematic review.","authors":"Kolten Abbott, Nicholas Seton, Gurjeevan Kaur, Jilai Zhao, Mark Jones, Kuljit Singh","doi":"10.1097/MCA.0000000000001483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A growing body of evidence supports short-term DAPT as safe and efficacious following PCI with DES. However, methodological criticism of RCTs has led to caution when translating results into clinical practice. This study aimed to critically appraise the methodological rigour of included studies and consolidate the evidence on the safety and efficacy of short-term DAPT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception until August 2022. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of published primary studies. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and the CASP tool. Evidence was rated for quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) score approach. Other endpoints were all-cause mortality and major bleeding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen RCTs were included. Based on GRADE score, there was a moderate level of certainty that the reported results for both outcomes are probably close to the true effect. A total of 78% (14/18) of RCTs had a low risk of bias when assessing all-cause mortality and 61% (11/18) when assessing major bleeding. The CASP tool confirmed methodological rigour; however, only 33% (6/18) of studies were applicable beyond the studied populations. Compared with 12 months of DAPT, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding [relative risk (RR): 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003, I2 = 45%] and trended towards a reduced risk in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-1.01, P = 0.08, I2 = 0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With moderate certainty evidence, short-term DAPT appears safe and efficacious post-PCI with DES in the studied populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":10702,"journal":{"name":"Coronary artery disease","volume":"36 4","pages":"312-325"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coronary artery disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCA.0000000000001483","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A growing body of evidence supports short-term DAPT as safe and efficacious following PCI with DES. However, methodological criticism of RCTs has led to caution when translating results into clinical practice. This study aimed to critically appraise the methodological rigour of included studies and consolidate the evidence on the safety and efficacy of short-term DAPT.

Methods: Medline, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception until August 2022. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of published primary studies. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and the CASP tool. Evidence was rated for quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) score approach. Other endpoints were all-cause mortality and major bleeding.

Results: Eighteen RCTs were included. Based on GRADE score, there was a moderate level of certainty that the reported results for both outcomes are probably close to the true effect. A total of 78% (14/18) of RCTs had a low risk of bias when assessing all-cause mortality and 61% (11/18) when assessing major bleeding. The CASP tool confirmed methodological rigour; however, only 33% (6/18) of studies were applicable beyond the studied populations. Compared with 12 months of DAPT, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding [relative risk (RR): 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003, I2 = 45%] and trended towards a reduced risk in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-1.01, P = 0.08, I2 = 0%).

Conclusion: With moderate certainty evidence, short-term DAPT appears safe and efficacious post-PCI with DES in the studied populations.

长期(12个月)vs短期(<12个月)双重抗血小板治疗经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后药物洗脱支架:关键评价和系统回顾
背景:越来越多的证据支持短期DAPT是PCI合并DES后安全有效的。然而,对随机对照试验的方法学批评导致在将结果转化为临床实践时要谨慎。本研究旨在批判性地评估纳入研究的方法学严峻性,并巩固短期DAPT安全性和有效性的证据。方法:检索Medline、Cochrane Library和Embase数据库,检索时间为建库至2022年8月。主要结果是发表的初步研究的方法学质量。使用RoB 2.0和CASP工具评估偏倚风险。采用建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)评分方法对证据的质量进行评分。其他终点是全因死亡率和大出血。结果:共纳入18项随机对照试验。基于GRADE评分,有中等程度的确定性,两个结果的报告结果可能接近真实效果。共有78%(14/18)的rct在评估全因死亡率时具有低偏倚风险,61%(11/18)的rct在评估大出血时具有低偏倚风险。CASP工具证实了方法的严谨性;然而,只有33%(6/18)的研究适用于研究人群之外。与12个月DAPT相比,短期DAPT与大出血风险降低相关[相对风险(RR): 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003, I2 = 45%],并有降低全因死亡风险的趋势(RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-1.01, P = 0.08, I2 = 0%)。结论:有中等确定性的证据表明,短期DAPT在pci术后DES患者中是安全有效的。
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
Coronary artery disease
Coronary artery disease 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
190
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Coronary Artery Disease welcomes reports of original research with a clinical emphasis, including observational studies, clinical trials, translational research, novel imaging, pharmacology and interventional approaches as well as advances in laboratory research that contribute to the understanding of coronary artery disease. Each issue of Coronary Artery Disease is divided into four areas of focus: Original Research articles, Review in Depth articles by leading experts in the field, Editorials and Images in Coronary Artery Disease. The Editorials will comment on selected original research published in each issue of Coronary Artery Disease, as well as highlight controversies in coronary artery disease understanding and management. Submitted artcles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and​ peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信