Comparison of Aspirin and P2Y12 Inhibitors for Secondary Prevention of Ischaemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 1.3 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Kaili Zhang, Yongle Wang, Tingting Liu, Xiaoyuan Niu
{"title":"Comparison of Aspirin and P2Y<sub>12</sub> Inhibitors for Secondary Prevention of Ischaemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Kaili Zhang,&nbsp;Yongle Wang,&nbsp;Tingting Liu,&nbsp;Xiaoyuan Niu","doi":"10.2174/2772432817666220526162144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors have been widely used as an alternative to aspirin in clinical practice for secondary stroke prevention. We aimed to compare the efficiency and safety of P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors and aspirin for stroke prevention in patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. All randomized trials that compared P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors with aspirin among patients with stroke were included. The primary efficacy outcomes of our meta-analysis included stroke, vascular events, and all-cause death. The primary safety outcome was minor or major bleeding events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 4 randomized clinical trials comparing P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors with aspirin for secondary stroke prevention that collectively enrolled 24508 patients (12253 received P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitor and 12255 received aspirin). Pooled results from the random-effects model showed that there were no significant differences in the risk of any stroke (OR 0.90 (0.78-1.04); I²=56.9%), vascular event (OR 0.91 (0.74-1.13); I²=78.3%), all-cause death (OR 0.98 (0.83-1.17); I²=0%), or minor or major bleeding (OR 1.13 (0.70-1.82); I²=79%) among patients who received a P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitor or aspirin. P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors were associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke (OR 0.84 (0.73- 0.96); I²=25%) than aspirin.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis suggests that P2Y<sub>12</sub> inhibitors are more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent ischaemic stroke among ischaemic stroke patients despite the absence of any effect on a new ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke, a new clinical vascular event, all-cause death, and major or minor bleeding events.</p>","PeriodicalId":29871,"journal":{"name":"Current Reviews in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology","volume":"18 3","pages":"270-283"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Reviews in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/2772432817666220526162144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: P2Y12 inhibitors have been widely used as an alternative to aspirin in clinical practice for secondary stroke prevention. We aimed to compare the efficiency and safety of P2Y12 inhibitors and aspirin for stroke prevention in patients with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. All randomized trials that compared P2Y12 inhibitors with aspirin among patients with stroke were included. The primary efficacy outcomes of our meta-analysis included stroke, vascular events, and all-cause death. The primary safety outcome was minor or major bleeding events.

Results: The search identified 4 randomized clinical trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitors with aspirin for secondary stroke prevention that collectively enrolled 24508 patients (12253 received P2Y12 inhibitor and 12255 received aspirin). Pooled results from the random-effects model showed that there were no significant differences in the risk of any stroke (OR 0.90 (0.78-1.04); I²=56.9%), vascular event (OR 0.91 (0.74-1.13); I²=78.3%), all-cause death (OR 0.98 (0.83-1.17); I²=0%), or minor or major bleeding (OR 1.13 (0.70-1.82); I²=79%) among patients who received a P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin. P2Y12 inhibitors were associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke (OR 0.84 (0.73- 0.96); I²=25%) than aspirin.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that P2Y12 inhibitors are more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent ischaemic stroke among ischaemic stroke patients despite the absence of any effect on a new ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke, a new clinical vascular event, all-cause death, and major or minor bleeding events.

阿司匹林和P2Y12抑制剂对缺血性脑卒中二级预防的比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
背景:P2Y12抑制剂在临床实践中被广泛用作阿司匹林的替代品,用于继发性脑卒中预防。我们的目的是比较P2Y12抑制剂和阿司匹林在既往卒中或短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)患者卒中预防中的有效性和安全性。方法:检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库。所有在卒中患者中比较P2Y12抑制剂与阿司匹林的随机试验均被纳入。我们荟萃分析的主要疗效结局包括卒中、血管事件和全因死亡。主要安全结局是轻微或严重出血事件。结果:检索确定了4项比较P2Y12抑制剂与阿司匹林用于继发性卒中预防的随机临床试验,共纳入24508例患者(12253例接受P2Y12抑制剂治疗,12255例接受阿司匹林治疗)。随机效应模型的汇总结果显示,卒中风险无显著差异(OR 0.90 (0.78-1.04);I²=56.9%),血管事件(OR 0.91 (0.74-1.13);I²=78.3%)、全因死亡(OR 0.98 (0.83-1.17);I²=0%),或轻度或重度出血(or 1.13 (0.70-1.82);I²=79%)在接受P2Y12抑制剂或阿司匹林的患者中。P2Y12抑制剂与缺血性卒中复发风险显著降低相关(OR 0.84 (0.73- 0.96);I²=25%)大于阿司匹林。结论:这项荟萃分析表明,P2Y12抑制剂在预防缺血性卒中患者复发性缺血性卒中方面比阿司匹林更有效,尽管对新的缺血性或出血性卒中、新的临床血管事件、全因死亡和重大或轻微出血事件没有任何影响。
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
55
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信