Efficacy and Safety of Antiplatelet Therapy After Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Target Trial Emulation.

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Ki Hong Choi, Danbee Kang, Jihee Nam, Take Kyu Park, Myung Gyu Song, Tae-Seok Seo, Woo Jin Yang, Seung-Hyuk Choi
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Antiplatelet Therapy After Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Target Trial Emulation.","authors":"Ki Hong Choi, Danbee Kang, Jihee Nam, Take Kyu Park, Myung Gyu Song, Tae-Seok Seo, Woo Jin Yang, Seung-Hyuk Choi","doi":"10.1161/JAHA.125.044102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal antiplatelet regimen after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains uncertain. Clinical guidelines offer limited recommendations, and data specific to this population are sparse. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of single versus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing standard EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study emulated a target trial using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, which includes the entire Korean population. We identified all patients who underwent standard EVAR between January 2003 and September 2023 and excluded those with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or no antiplatelet therapy. Patients were categorized by discharge medication into single antiplatelet therapy or DAPT groups. The primary cardiovascular efficacy end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke). The EVAR-specific efficacy end point was abdominal aortic aneurysm reintervention or surgery. The safety end point was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Inverse probability treatment weighting was applied to adjust baseline differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 8325 patients, 4162 (50.0%) received single antiplatelet therapy (80.6% aspirin, 19.4% clopidogrel), and 4163 (50.0%) received DAPT (aspirin plus clopidogrel). There were no significant differences between single antiplatelet therapy and DAPT in the risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (inverse probability treatment weighting-hazard ratio [HR], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.93-1.22]) or abdominal aortic aneurysm reintervention/surgery (inverse probability treatment weighting-HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.92-1.24]). However, DAPT was associated with a higher risk of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (inverse probability treatment weighting-HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.02-1.41]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease undergoing standard EVAR, DAPT did not confer cardiovascular or procedural benefit but was associated with increased bleeding. Single antiplatelet therapy may represent a safer and equally effective antiplatelet strategy in this population.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT06876727.</p>","PeriodicalId":54370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":" ","pages":"e044102"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.125.044102","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

Background: The optimal antiplatelet regimen after standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains uncertain. Clinical guidelines offer limited recommendations, and data specific to this population are sparse. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of single versus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing standard EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Methods: This study emulated a target trial using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, which includes the entire Korean population. We identified all patients who underwent standard EVAR between January 2003 and September 2023 and excluded those with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or no antiplatelet therapy. Patients were categorized by discharge medication into single antiplatelet therapy or DAPT groups. The primary cardiovascular efficacy end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke). The EVAR-specific efficacy end point was abdominal aortic aneurysm reintervention or surgery. The safety end point was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Inverse probability treatment weighting was applied to adjust baseline differences.

Results: Among 8325 patients, 4162 (50.0%) received single antiplatelet therapy (80.6% aspirin, 19.4% clopidogrel), and 4163 (50.0%) received DAPT (aspirin plus clopidogrel). There were no significant differences between single antiplatelet therapy and DAPT in the risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (inverse probability treatment weighting-hazard ratio [HR], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.93-1.22]) or abdominal aortic aneurysm reintervention/surgery (inverse probability treatment weighting-HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.92-1.24]). However, DAPT was associated with a higher risk of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (inverse probability treatment weighting-HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.02-1.41]).

Conclusions: In patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease undergoing standard EVAR, DAPT did not confer cardiovascular or procedural benefit but was associated with increased bleeding. Single antiplatelet therapy may represent a safer and equally effective antiplatelet strategy in this population.

Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT06876727.

血管内主动脉修复后抗血小板治疗的有效性和安全性:一项目标试验模拟。
背景:对于无动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病的患者,标准血管内动脉瘤修复(EVAR)后的最佳抗血小板方案仍不确定。临床指南提供的建议有限,针对这一人群的数据也很少。本研究旨在比较单抗血小板治疗与双抗血小板治疗(DAPT)在未确诊动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病的腹主动脉瘤标准EVAR患者中的疗效和安全性。方法:本研究使用韩国国民健康保险服务数据库模拟了一项目标试验,其中包括整个韩国人口。我们确定了2003年1月至2023年9月期间接受标准EVAR的所有患者,排除了患有动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病或未接受抗血小板治疗的患者。患者按出院用药分为单抗血小板治疗组和DAPT组。心血管疗效的主要终点是主要的心脑血管不良事件(全因死亡、心肌梗死或缺血性中风)。evar特异性疗效终点为腹主动脉瘤再干预或手术。安全性终点为大出血或临床相关的非大出血。采用逆概率处理加权调整基线差异。结果:8325例患者中,4162例(50.0%)接受单一抗血小板治疗(80.6%阿司匹林+ 19.4%氯吡格雷),4163例(50.0%)接受DAPT(阿司匹林+氯吡格雷)。单次抗血小板治疗与DAPT在主要心脑血管不良事件发生风险(治疗权重-风险比[HR], 1.07 [95% CI, 0.93-1.22])或腹主动脉瘤再干预/手术(治疗权重-HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.92-1.24])方面无显著差异。然而,DAPT与大出血或临床相关的非大出血的高风险相关(负概率治疗权重- hr, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.02-1.41])。结论:在接受标准EVAR的无动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病患者中,DAPT没有心血管或手术益处,但与出血增加有关。在这一人群中,单一抗血小板治疗可能是一种更安全、同样有效的抗血小板策略。注册:网址:https://clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT06876727。
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
Journal of the American Heart Association
Journal of the American Heart Association CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
1749
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: As an Open Access journal, JAHA - Journal of the American Heart Association is rapidly and freely available, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice. JAHA is an authoritative, peer-reviewed Open Access journal focusing on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. JAHA provides a global forum for basic and clinical research and timely reviews on cardiovascular disease and stroke. As an Open Access journal, its content is free on publication to read, download, and share, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.
×
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