Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Ischemic Stroke Stratified by Intracranial or Extracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis.

IF 7.7 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Yingying Yang, Jianbo Yang, Ying Gao, Weiqi Chen, Xuan Wang, Hongyi Yan, Tingting Wang, Yongjun Wang, Yuesong Pan, Yilong Wang
{"title":"Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Ischemic Stroke Stratified by Intracranial or Extracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis.","authors":"Yingying Yang, Jianbo Yang, Ying Gao, Weiqi Chen, Xuan Wang, Hongyi Yan, Tingting Wang, Yongjun Wang, Yuesong Pan, Yilong Wang","doi":"10.1002/ana.78049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin for acute mild stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack (TIA) stratified by the status of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) or extracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ECAS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was a subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Participants with mild ischemic stroke or TIA were assigned to receive either clopidogrel plus aspirin or aspirin monotherapy. Participants were categorized into 4 groups by the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS: ICAS + ECAS group, only ECAS group, only ICAS group, and no stenosis group. The primary efficacy end point was any new stroke and the primary safety end point was moderate-to-severe bleeding within 90 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study enrolled 5,664 patients. Compared with other groups, the ICAS + ECAS group had a higher risk of recurrent stroke within 90 days (no stenosis = 5.7%; only ICAS = 7.2%; only ECAS = 10.3%; and ICAS + ECAS = 13.2%; p < 0.001). Although clopidogrel plus aspirin showed a numerically lower recurrence risk versus aspirin alone, no significant treatment effect difference emerged across the 4 groups. No significant interaction between antiplatelet therapy and the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS for recurrent stroke and moderate-to-severe bleeding was identified.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>For acute mild ischemic stroke or TIA, although patients with both symptomatic ICAS and ECAS exhibited an elevated risk of recurrent stroke than other patients, no interaction effect between antiplatelet therapy and the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS for the risk of new stroke and moderate-to-severe bleeding was observed. ANN NEUROL 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":127,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.78049","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin for acute mild stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack (TIA) stratified by the status of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) or extracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ECAS).

Methods: The study was a subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Participants with mild ischemic stroke or TIA were assigned to receive either clopidogrel plus aspirin or aspirin monotherapy. Participants were categorized into 4 groups by the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS: ICAS + ECAS group, only ECAS group, only ICAS group, and no stenosis group. The primary efficacy end point was any new stroke and the primary safety end point was moderate-to-severe bleeding within 90 days.

Results: The study enrolled 5,664 patients. Compared with other groups, the ICAS + ECAS group had a higher risk of recurrent stroke within 90 days (no stenosis = 5.7%; only ICAS = 7.2%; only ECAS = 10.3%; and ICAS + ECAS = 13.2%; p < 0.001). Although clopidogrel plus aspirin showed a numerically lower recurrence risk versus aspirin alone, no significant treatment effect difference emerged across the 4 groups. No significant interaction between antiplatelet therapy and the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS for recurrent stroke and moderate-to-severe bleeding was identified.

Interpretation: For acute mild ischemic stroke or TIA, although patients with both symptomatic ICAS and ECAS exhibited an elevated risk of recurrent stroke than other patients, no interaction effect between antiplatelet therapy and the status of symptomatic ICAS or ECAS for the risk of new stroke and moderate-to-severe bleeding was observed. ANN NEUROL 2025.

颅内或颅外动脉粥样硬化性狭窄分层缺血性卒中后的双重抗血小板治疗。
目的:本研究的目的是评估氯吡格雷加阿司匹林治疗急性轻度卒中或高危短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)的疗效和安全性,这些患者的症状分为颅内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄(ICAS)或颅外动脉粥样硬化性狭窄(ECAS)。方法:采用随机临床试验的亚组分析。轻度缺血性卒中或TIA患者被分配接受氯吡格雷加阿司匹林或阿司匹林单药治疗。根据有症状的ICAS或ECAS情况将参与者分为4组:ICAS + ECAS组、仅ECAS组、仅ICAS组和无狭窄组。主要疗效终点是任何新的卒中,主要安全性终点是90天内的中度至重度出血。结果:该研究纳入了5664名患者。与其他组相比,ICAS + ECAS组在90天内卒中复发的风险更高(无狭窄= 5.7%,只有ICAS = 7.2%,只有ECAS = 10.3%, ICAS + ECAS = 13.2%;p解释:对于急性轻度缺血性卒中或TIA,尽管症状性ICAS和ECAS患者卒中复发风险高于其他患者,但未观察到抗血小板治疗与症状性ICAS或ECAS状态之间对新发卒中和中重度出血风险的相互作用。Ann neurol 2025。
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
Annals of Neurology
Annals of Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
1.80%
发文量
270
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Neurology publishes original articles with potential for high impact in understanding the pathogenesis, clinical and laboratory features, diagnosis, treatment, outcomes and science underlying diseases of the human nervous system. Articles should ideally be of broad interest to the academic neurological community rather than solely to subspecialists in a particular field. Studies involving experimental model system, including those in cell and organ cultures and animals, of direct translational relevance to the understanding of neurological disease are also encouraged.
×
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