{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Aspirin and Indobufen in the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Diseases: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Wenhao Pan, Linger Guan, Haicheng Zhang","doi":"10.2196/75363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The pathogenesis of atherosclerotic thrombosis primarily involves platelet activation and aggregation, making antiplatelet therapy the cornerstone of treatment for such diseases.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of aspirin and indobufen in antiplatelet therapy for patients with atherosclerotic diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Chinese Wanfang databases. The literature was screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk ratio (RR) was used to assess the magnitude of risk associated with exposure and our inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) the study population comprised adults (aged 18 years and older) with coronary heart disease caused by coronary artery atherosclerosis or stroke caused by intracranial atherosclerosis; (2) the intervention was represented by indobufen in the study groups versus aspirin in the control groups; (3) the primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events or any bleeding or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2/3/5 bleeding; (4) the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke; adverse cardiovascular events such as coronary thrombus reformation, heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and cardiovascular death; stroke; myocardial infarction; and cardiovascular death; and (5) the studies were randomized clinical trials with either crossover or parallel designs or prospective observational trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen trials with a total of 12,981 patients were included in this study. Compared to aspirin, indobufen reduced the risk of (1) bleeding events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71; P<.0001), (2) Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2/3/5 bleeding (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.94; P=.03), (3) adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61; P<.00001), and (4) myocardial infarction (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.89; P=.01). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, stroke, or cardiovascular mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with aspirin, indobufen demonstrated better safety and was not inferior to aspirin in terms of efficacy, with superior results in some aspects (eg, fewer risks of adverse cardiovascular events and myocardial infarction). Further studies with larger sample sizes or longer follow-up periods may provide additional evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51757,"journal":{"name":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","volume":"14 ","pages":"e75363"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12391900/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/75363","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The pathogenesis of atherosclerotic thrombosis primarily involves platelet activation and aggregation, making antiplatelet therapy the cornerstone of treatment for such diseases.
Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of aspirin and indobufen in antiplatelet therapy for patients with atherosclerotic diseases.
Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Chinese Wanfang databases. The literature was screened according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Risk ratio (RR) was used to assess the magnitude of risk associated with exposure and our inclusion criteria are as follows: (1) the study population comprised adults (aged 18 years and older) with coronary heart disease caused by coronary artery atherosclerosis or stroke caused by intracranial atherosclerosis; (2) the intervention was represented by indobufen in the study groups versus aspirin in the control groups; (3) the primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events or any bleeding or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2/3/5 bleeding; (4) the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke; adverse cardiovascular events such as coronary thrombus reformation, heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and cardiovascular death; stroke; myocardial infarction; and cardiovascular death; and (5) the studies were randomized clinical trials with either crossover or parallel designs or prospective observational trials.
Results: Eighteen trials with a total of 12,981 patients were included in this study. Compared to aspirin, indobufen reduced the risk of (1) bleeding events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71; P<.0001), (2) Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2/3/5 bleeding (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.94; P=.03), (3) adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61; P<.00001), and (4) myocardial infarction (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.89; P=.01). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, stroke, or cardiovascular mortality.
Conclusions: Compared with aspirin, indobufen demonstrated better safety and was not inferior to aspirin in terms of efficacy, with superior results in some aspects (eg, fewer risks of adverse cardiovascular events and myocardial infarction). Further studies with larger sample sizes or longer follow-up periods may provide additional evidence.
背景:动脉粥样硬化性血栓形成的发病机制主要与血小板活化和聚集有关,因此抗血小板治疗是此类疾病治疗的基础。目的:本荟萃分析旨在比较阿司匹林和吲哚布芬在动脉粥样硬化性疾病患者抗血小板治疗中的安全性和有效性。方法:检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Chinese Wanfang数据库。根据预先设定的纳入和排除标准对文献进行筛选。风险比(RR)用于评估与暴露相关的风险程度,我们的纳入标准如下:(1)研究人群包括由冠状动脉粥样硬化引起的冠心病或颅内动脉粥样硬化引起的中风的成年人(18岁及以上);(2)干预以研究组的吲哚布芬和对照组的阿司匹林为代表;(3)主要转归为主要心脑血管不良事件发生率或任何出血或出血学术研究联合体2/3/5出血;(4)次要结局为心血管死亡、心肌梗死和缺血性脑卒中;不良心血管事件,如冠状动脉血栓形成、心力衰竭、心肌梗死、中风、心绞痛和心血管死亡;中风;心肌梗死;心血管死亡;(5)研究为随机临床试验,采用交叉或平行设计或前瞻性观察试验。结果:本研究纳入18项试验,共12981例患者。与阿司匹林相比,吲哚布芬降低了(1)出血事件的风险(RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71);结论:与阿司匹林相比,吲哚布芬的安全性更好,在疗效上并不逊色于阿司匹林,在某些方面(如不良心血管事件和心肌梗死的风险更低)效果更佳。更大样本量或更长随访期的进一步研究可能会提供更多证据。