无口服抗凝指征的缺血性脑卒中患者在标准抗血小板治疗中加入口服抗凝剂的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析

IF 8.7 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
International Journal of Stroke Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-12 DOI:10.1177/17474930251337354
Anastasia Adamou, Dimitra Papadimitriou, Davide Strambo, Eleni Korompoki, Patrik Michel, George Ntaios
{"title":"无口服抗凝指征的缺血性脑卒中患者在标准抗血小板治疗中加入口服抗凝剂的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析","authors":"Anastasia Adamou, Dimitra Papadimitriou, Davide Strambo, Eleni Korompoki, Patrik Michel, George Ntaios","doi":"10.1177/17474930251337354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite multiple effective secondary prevention strategies, the risk for stroke recurrence remains remarkable, and further ways to mitigate it are warranted. The results of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial could generate the hypothesis that the addition of low-dose oral anticoagulation to the standard antiplatelet treatment could be beneficial for the prevention of stroke recurrence among patients with acute ischemic stroke who have no indication for oral anticoagulation. We aimed to assess this hypothesis with a systematic review and meta-analysis of currently available evidence from randomized controlled trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, we systematically reviewed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 14 January 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials including participants with acute ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack with no indication for oral anticoagulation, who were randomized to a combination strategy of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelets versus antiplatelets alone. The outcomes studied included recurrent stroke, major hemorrhage, their combination (net clinical benefit outcome), any stroke, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected covert brain infarct.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1850 screened studies, 4 were eligible including 6893 patients (50.4% women). There were 430 stroke recurrences during an overall follow-up period of 6137 patient-years. Compared to patients assigned to standard antiplatelet treatment, those assigned to the combination strategy had a similar risk of ischemic stroke recurrence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-1.17), net clinical benefit outcome (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.88-1.43), any stroke (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.65-1.18), covert brain infarct (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.86-1.31), but a higher risk of major hemorrhage (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.25-3.90).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The strategy of combination of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet treatment should not be chosen in patients with acute ischemic stroke and no indication for oral anticoagulation, unless the results of ongoing trials like the LIBREXIA-Stroke and OCEANIC-Stroke yield different conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":14442,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stroke","volume":" ","pages":"776-785"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of addition of oral anticoagulant to standard antiplatelet treatment in patients with ischemic stroke and no indication for oral anticoagulation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Anastasia Adamou, Dimitra Papadimitriou, Davide Strambo, Eleni Korompoki, Patrik Michel, George Ntaios\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17474930251337354\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite multiple effective secondary prevention strategies, the risk for stroke recurrence remains remarkable, and further ways to mitigate it are warranted. The results of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial could generate the hypothesis that the addition of low-dose oral anticoagulation to the standard antiplatelet treatment could be beneficial for the prevention of stroke recurrence among patients with acute ischemic stroke who have no indication for oral anticoagulation. We aimed to assess this hypothesis with a systematic review and meta-analysis of currently available evidence from randomized controlled trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, we systematically reviewed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 14 January 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials including participants with acute ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack with no indication for oral anticoagulation, who were randomized to a combination strategy of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelets versus antiplatelets alone. The outcomes studied included recurrent stroke, major hemorrhage, their combination (net clinical benefit outcome), any stroke, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected covert brain infarct.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1850 screened studies, 4 were eligible including 6893 patients (50.4% women). There were 430 stroke recurrences during an overall follow-up period of 6137 patient-years. Compared to patients assigned to standard antiplatelet treatment, those assigned to the combination strategy had a similar risk of ischemic stroke recurrence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-1.17), net clinical benefit outcome (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.88-1.43), any stroke (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.65-1.18), covert brain infarct (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.86-1.31), but a higher risk of major hemorrhage (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.25-3.90).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The strategy of combination of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet treatment should not be chosen in patients with acute ischemic stroke and no indication for oral anticoagulation, unless the results of ongoing trials like the LIBREXIA-Stroke and OCEANIC-Stroke yield different conclusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Stroke\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"776-785\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Stroke\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930251337354\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930251337354","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管有多种有效的二级预防策略,卒中复发的风险仍然显著,需要进一步的方法来减轻它。使用抗凝策略的人的心血管结局(COMPASS)试验的结果可以产生这样的假设,即在标准抗血小板治疗中加入低剂量口服抗凝可能有利于预防无口服抗凝指征的急性缺血性卒中患者的卒中复发。我们的目的是通过对随机对照试验中现有证据的系统回顾和荟萃分析来评估这一假设。方法:按照系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)系统评价和元分析报告指南,我们系统地回顾了MEDLINE、Scopus和ClinicalTrials.gov,直到2025年1月14日。符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验,纳入无口服抗凝指征的急性缺血性卒中或高风险短暂性缺血性发作患者,随机分为口服抗凝联合抗血小板治疗组和单独抗血小板治疗组。研究的结果包括复发性卒中、大出血、它们的组合(净临床获益结果)、任何卒中和磁共振成像(MRI)检测的隐蔽性脑梗死。结果:在1850项筛选研究中,4项符合条件,包括6893例患者(50.4%为女性)。在6137例患者年的总体随访期间,有430例卒中复发。与接受标准抗血小板治疗的患者相比,接受联合治疗的患者缺血性卒中复发风险相似(优势比(OR) = 0.89, 95%可信区间(CI) = 0.68-1.17),净临床获益结果(OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.88-1.43),任何中风(OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.65-1.18),隐性脑梗死(OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.86-1.31),但大出血风险较高(OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.25-3.90)。结论:急性缺血性脑卒中无口服抗凝指征的患者不应选择口服抗凝联合抗血小板治疗策略,除非LIBREXIA-Stroke、OCEANIC-Stroke等正在进行的试验结果得出不同的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of addition of oral anticoagulant to standard antiplatelet treatment in patients with ischemic stroke and no indication for oral anticoagulation: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Despite multiple effective secondary prevention strategies, the risk for stroke recurrence remains remarkable, and further ways to mitigate it are warranted. The results of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial could generate the hypothesis that the addition of low-dose oral anticoagulation to the standard antiplatelet treatment could be beneficial for the prevention of stroke recurrence among patients with acute ischemic stroke who have no indication for oral anticoagulation. We aimed to assess this hypothesis with a systematic review and meta-analysis of currently available evidence from randomized controlled trials.

Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, we systematically reviewed MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 14 January 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials including participants with acute ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack with no indication for oral anticoagulation, who were randomized to a combination strategy of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelets versus antiplatelets alone. The outcomes studied included recurrent stroke, major hemorrhage, their combination (net clinical benefit outcome), any stroke, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected covert brain infarct.

Results: Among 1850 screened studies, 4 were eligible including 6893 patients (50.4% women). There were 430 stroke recurrences during an overall follow-up period of 6137 patient-years. Compared to patients assigned to standard antiplatelet treatment, those assigned to the combination strategy had a similar risk of ischemic stroke recurrence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-1.17), net clinical benefit outcome (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.88-1.43), any stroke (OR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.65-1.18), covert brain infarct (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.86-1.31), but a higher risk of major hemorrhage (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.25-3.90).

Conclusion: The strategy of combination of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet treatment should not be chosen in patients with acute ischemic stroke and no indication for oral anticoagulation, unless the results of ongoing trials like the LIBREXIA-Stroke and OCEANIC-Stroke yield different conclusions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Stroke
International Journal of Stroke 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
13.90
自引率
6.00%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Stroke is a welcome addition to the international stroke journal landscape in that it concentrates on the clinical aspects of stroke with basic science contributions in areas of clinical interest. Reviews of current topics are broadly based to encompass not only recent advances of global interest but also those which may be more important in certain regions and the journal regularly features items of news interest from all parts of the world. To facilitate the international nature of the journal, our Associate Editors from Europe, Asia, North America and South America coordinate segments of the journal.
×
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