Anika Chowdhury, Dhruvkumar Arvindbhai Vasoya, Mahfuja Jahan Ima, Srija Reddy Koppula, Ashesh Das, Kiran Kumar Dhivakaran, Muhammad Muneeb Khawar, Aadya Mishra, Muhammad Safiullah, Saman Siddique, Deng Siang Lee, Muhammad Hamza, Hemeesh Tandel, Aniket Chatterjee
{"title":"Safety and efficacy of routine anticoagulation after primary PCI in STEMI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Anika Chowdhury, Dhruvkumar Arvindbhai Vasoya, Mahfuja Jahan Ima, Srija Reddy Koppula, Ashesh Das, Kiran Kumar Dhivakaran, Muhammad Muneeb Khawar, Aadya Mishra, Muhammad Safiullah, Saman Siddique, Deng Siang Lee, Muhammad Hamza, Hemeesh Tandel, Aniket Chatterjee","doi":"10.1007/s11239-025-03130-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) is a widely used minimally invasive procedure that restores blood flow to the coronary artery, improving survival in STEMI patients. Despite its widespread application in clinical settings, the necessity and efficacy of postprocedural anticoagulation (PPAC) remain contentious. Our study aims to assess the outcomes of PPAC in STEMI patients who have undergone PCI. A comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, and Clinicaltrials was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical outcomes between PPAC and control (placebo or no PPAC) for STEMI after primary PCI. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.4.1, employing a random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of Bias Assessment of the articles was assessed using RoB 2.0 software by the Cochrane Collaboration. A total of 5 RCTs comprising 13,586 patients were included, of which 6,829 patients (50.26%) received PPAC. Compared to the non-PPAC group, PPAC did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.84-1.39; P = 0.54, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.83-1.39; P = 0.57, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%), and MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events) (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.92-1.37; P = 0.25, I<sup>2</sup> = 22%). Additionally, the odds of stent thrombosis (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.77-1.47; P = 0.69, I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) and stroke (OR 1.50; 95% CI 0.49-4.57; P = 0.48, I<sup>2</sup> = 58%) did not differ significantly between the groups. However, PPAC was associated with higher odds of bleeding (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.07-2.97; P = 0.03, I<sup>2</sup> = 94%). This meta-analysis reveals no significant differences in the odds of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, and stroke between PPAC and control following PCI for the management of STEMI. However, PPAC was associated with higher odds of bleeding. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to corroborate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":17546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-025-03130-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) is a widely used minimally invasive procedure that restores blood flow to the coronary artery, improving survival in STEMI patients. Despite its widespread application in clinical settings, the necessity and efficacy of postprocedural anticoagulation (PPAC) remain contentious. Our study aims to assess the outcomes of PPAC in STEMI patients who have undergone PCI. A comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, and Clinicaltrials was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical outcomes between PPAC and control (placebo or no PPAC) for STEMI after primary PCI. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.4.1, employing a random-effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Risk of Bias Assessment of the articles was assessed using RoB 2.0 software by the Cochrane Collaboration. A total of 5 RCTs comprising 13,586 patients were included, of which 6,829 patients (50.26%) received PPAC. Compared to the non-PPAC group, PPAC did not significantly reduce all-cause mortality (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.84-1.39; P = 0.54, I2 = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.83-1.39; P = 0.57, I2 = 0%), and MACE (major adverse cardiovascular events) (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.92-1.37; P = 0.25, I2 = 22%). Additionally, the odds of stent thrombosis (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.77-1.47; P = 0.69, I2 = 0%) and stroke (OR 1.50; 95% CI 0.49-4.57; P = 0.48, I2 = 58%) did not differ significantly between the groups. However, PPAC was associated with higher odds of bleeding (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.07-2.97; P = 0.03, I2 = 94%). This meta-analysis reveals no significant differences in the odds of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, and stroke between PPAC and control following PCI for the management of STEMI. However, PPAC was associated with higher odds of bleeding. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to corroborate these findings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis is a long-awaited resource for contemporary cardiologists, hematologists, vascular medicine specialists and clinician-scientists actively involved in treatment decisions and clinical investigation of thrombotic disorders involving the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular systems. The principal focus of the Journal centers on the pathobiology of thrombosis and vascular disorders and the use of anticoagulants, platelet antagonists, cell-based therapies and interventions in scientific investigation, clinical-translational research and patient care.
The Journal will publish original work which emphasizes the interface between fundamental scientific principles and clinical investigation, stimulating an interdisciplinary and scholarly dialogue in thrombosis and vascular science. Published works will also define platforms for translational research, drug development, clinical trials and patient-directed applications. The Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis'' integrated format will expand the reader''s knowledge base and provide important insights for both the investigation and direct clinical application of the most rapidly growing fields in medicine-thrombosis and vascular science.