Dataset Information

Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the effects of antiplatelets and anticoagulants on stroke and death in patients with acute cervical artery dissection.

Design

Systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis.

Data sources

The reviewers searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to November 2012, checked reference lists, and contacted authors.

Study selection

Studies were eligible if they were randomised, quasi-randomised or observational comparisons of antiplatelets and anticoagulants in patients with cervical artery dissection.

Data extraction

Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by another. Bayesian techniques were used to appropriately account for studies with scarce event data and imbalances in the size of comparison groups.

Data synthesis

Thirty-seven studies (1991 patients) were included. We found no randomised trial. The primary analysis revealed a large treatment effect in favour of antiplatelets for preventing the primary composite outcome of ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage or death within the first 3 months after treatment initiation (relative risk 0.32, 95% credibility interval 0.12 to 0.63), while the degree of between-study heterogeneity was moderate (?(2)?=?0.18). In an analysis restricted to studies of higher methodological quality, the possible advantage of antiplatelets over anticoagulants was less obvious than in the main analysis (relative risk 0.73, 95% credibility interval 0.17 to 2.30).

Conclusion

In view of these results and the safety advantages, easier usage and lower cost of antiplatelets, we conclude that antiplatelets should be given precedence over anticoagulants as a first line treatment in patients with cervical artery dissection unless results of an adequately powered randomised trial suggest the opposite.

SUBMITTER: Sarikaya H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3764185 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis.

Sarikaya Hakan H da Costa Bruno R BR Baumgartner Ralf W RW Duclos Kathleen K Touzé Emmanuel E de Bray Jean M JM Metso Antti A Metso Tiina T Arnold Marcel M Arauz Antonio A Zwahlen Marcel M Jüni Peter P

PloS one 20130905 9

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the effects of antiplatelets and anticoagulants on stroke and death in patients with acute cervical artery dissection.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis.<h4>Data sources</h4>The reviewers searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to November 2012, checked reference lists, and contacted authors.<h4>Study selection</h4>Studies were eligible if they were randomised, quasi-randomised or observational comparisons of antiplatelets and anticoagula ...[more]

PMID: 24039795

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesIn young people aged < 50 years, cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is among the most common causes of stroke. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the safest and most effective antithrombotic treatment for CeAD. We aimed to synthesize concrete evidence from studies that compared the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet (AP) versus anticoagulant (AC) therapies for CeAD.MethodsWe searched major electronic databases/search engines from inception till September 2021. Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anticoagulants with antiplatelets for CeAD were included. A meta-analysis was conducted using articles that were obtained and found to be relevant. Mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for continuous data and odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data.ResultsOur analysis included 15 studies involving 2064 patients, 909 (44%) of whom received antiplatelets and 1155 (56%) received anticoagulants. Our analysis showed a non-significant difference in terms of the 3-month mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.03-7.58), > 3-month mortality (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.40-6.56), recurrent stroke (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46-2.02), recurrent transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.44-1.98), symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.19), and complete recanalization (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46-1.06). Regarding primary ischaemic stroke, the results favoured AC over AP among RCTs (OR 6.97, 95% CI 1.25-38.83).ConclusionOur study did not show a considerable difference between the two groups, as all outcomes showed non-significant differences between them, except for primary ischaemic stroke (RCTs) and complete recanalization (observational studies), which showed a significant favour of AC over AP. Even though primary ischaemic stroke is an important outcome, several crucial points that could affect these results should be paid attention to. These include the incomplete adjustment for the confounding effect of AP-AC doses, frequencies, administration compliance, and others. We recommend more well-designed studies to assess if unnecessary anticoagulation can be avoided in CeAD.

Project description:Objective: The optimal management for cervical artery dissection (CAD) is uncertain. This study aimed to summarize the current randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapies for CAD. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the major databases, such as MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Only the RCTs comparing the antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapies for the patients with CAD were included. Combined estimates of the relative risk (RR) of antiplatelet vs. anticoagulation were analyzed. Heterogeneity was measured using the I 2 statistical analysis. The analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) population, respectively. Results: Two RCTs involving 444 patients in the ITT population and 370 patients in the PP population were included. The quality of studies was high overall. In the ITT population, compared with the patients in the anticoagulation group, the patients in the antiplatelet group showed a higher rate of ischemic stroke within 3 months (RR = 6.73 [95% CI, 1.22-37.15], I 2 = 0%, P = 0.029). No difference between these two treatment groups was found for the outcomes of transient ischemic attack (RR = 0.37 [95% CI, 0.09-1.58], I 2 = 0%, P = 0.181), intracranial hemorrhage (RR = 0.33 [95% CI, 0.01-7.98], I 2 = 0%, P = 0.494), major extracranial bleeding (RR = 0.31 [95% CI, 0.01-7.60], I 2 = 0%, P = 0.476), or the composite of these outcomes within 3 months. For the PP population, the results of the meta-analysis of outcomes between the antiplatelet and anticoagulation groups were consistent with the ITT population. Conclusions: Compared with the antiplatelet group, the anticoagulation group has a lower risk of ischemic stroke without increasing bleeding risk when treating CAD. Anticoagulation seems to be superior over the antiplatelet in treating CAD but needs to be further tested by specifying several issues, such as location, initial symptom types, and treatment protocols.

Project description:IntroductionIn patients with stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection, we compared endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis regarding three-month outcome, recanalisation and complications.Materials and methodsIn a multicentre intravenous thrombolysis/endovascular therapy-register-based cohort study, all consecutive cervical artery dissection patients with intracranial artery occlusion treated within 6?h were eligible for analysis. Endovascular therapy patients (with or without prior intravenous thrombolysis) were compared to intravenous thrombolysis patients regarding (i) excellent three-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1), (ii) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, (iii) recanalisation of the occluded intracranial artery and (iv) death. Upon a systematic literature review, we performed a meta-analysis comparing endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients regarding three-month outcome using a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model.ResultsAmong 62 cervical artery dissection patients (median age 48.8 years), 24 received intravenous thrombolysis and 38 received endovascular therapy. Excellent three-month outcome occurred in 23.7% endovascular therapy and 20.8% with intravenous thrombolysis patients. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred solely among endovascular therapy patients (5/38 patients, 13.2%) while four (80%) of these patients had bridging therapy; 6/38 endovascular therapy and 0/24 intravenous thrombolysis patients died. Four of these 6 endovascular therapy patients had bridging therapy. Recanalisation was achieved in 84.2% endovascular therapy patients and 66.7% intravenous thrombolysis patients (odds ratio 3.2, 95% confidence interval [0.9-11.38]). Sensitivity analyses in a subgroup treated within 4.5?h revealed a higher recanalisation rate among endovascular therapy patients (odds ratio 3.87, 95% confidence interval [1.00-14.95]), but no change in the key clinical findings. In a meta-analysis across eight studies (n?=?212 patients), cervical artery dissection patients (110 intravenous thrombolysis and 102 endovascular therapy) showed identical odds for favourable outcome (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.38-2.44]) among endovascular therapy patients and intravenous thrombolysis patients.Discussion and conclusionIn this cohort study, there was no clear signal of superiority of endovascular therapy over intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients, which - given the limitation of our sample size - does not prove that endovascular therapy in these patients cannot be superior in future studies. The observation that symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and deaths in the endovascular therapy group occurred predominantly in bridging patients requires further investigation.

Project description:ImportanceExtracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissection is an important cause of stroke, particularly in younger individuals. In some but not all observational studies, it has been associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke. Both antiplatelet agents (APs) and anticoagulants (ACs) are used to reduce stroke risk, but whether 1 treatment strategy is more effective is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine whether AP or AC therapy is more effective in preventing stroke in cervical dissection and the risk of recurrent stroke in a randomized clinical trial setting. A secondary outcome was to determine the effect on arterial imaging outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized, prospective, open-label international multicenter parallel design study with central blinded review of both clinical and imaging end points. Recruitment was conducted in 39 stroke and neurology secondary care centers in the United Kingdom and 7 centers in Australia between February 24, 2006, and June 17, 2013. One-year follow-up and analysis was conducted in 2018. Two hundred fifty participants with extracranial carotid and vertebral dissection with symptom onset within the last 7 days were recruited. Follow-up data at 1 year were available for all participants.InterventionsRandomization to AP or AC (heparin followed by warfarin) for 3 months, after which the choice of AP and AC agents was decided by the local clinician.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was ipsilateral stroke and death. A planned per protocol (PP) analysis was performed in patients meeting the inclusion criteria following central review of imaging to confirm the diagnosis of dissection. A secondary end point was angiographic recanalization in those with imaging confirmed dissection.ResultsTwo hundred fifty patients were randomized (118 carotid and 132 vertebral), 126 to AP and 124 to AC. Mean (SD) age was 49 (12) years. Mean (SD) time to randomization was 3.65 (1.91) days. The recurrent stroke rate at 1 year was 6 of 250 (2.4%) on ITT analysis and 5 of 197 (2.5%) on PP analysis. There were no significant differences between treatment groups for any outcome. Of the 181 patients with confirmed dissection and complete imaging at baseline and 3 months, there was no difference in the presence of residual narrowing or occlusion between those receiving AP (n = 56 of 92) vs those receiving AC (n = 53 of 89) (P = .97).Conclusions and relevanceDuring 12 months of follow-up, the number of recurrent strokes was low. There was no difference between treatment groups in outcome events or the rate of recanalization.Trial registrationISRCTN.com Identifier: CTN44555237.

Project description:IntroductionThe type of antithrombotic treatment in cervical artery dissection patients is still a matter of debate. Most physicians prefer anticoagulants over antiplatelet agents for stroke prevention. However, this approach is not evidence-based and antiplatelets might be as safe and as effective. The 'Biomarkers and Antithrombotic Treatment in Cervical Artery Dissection' ('TREAT-CAD') trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02046460) compares Aspirin to oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists) with regard to efficacy and safety by using both clinical and imaging surrogate outcome measures. TREAT-CAD tests the hypothesis, that aspirin is as safe and effective as vitamin K antagonists.Patients and methodsTREAD-CAD is a Prospective, Randomised controlled, Open-labelled, multicentre, non-inferiority trial with Blinded assessment of outcome Events (PROBE-design). Key eligibility criteria are (i) clinical symptoms attributable to cervical artery dissection and (ii) verification of the cervical artery dissection diagnosis by established magnetic resonance imaging criteria. Patients are randomised to receive either Aspirin 300 mg daily or vitamin K antagonists for 90 days.ResultsPrimary outcomes are assessed at 14 ± 10 days (magnetic resonance imaging and clinical examination) and at 90 ± 30 days (clinical examinations). The primary endpoint is a composite outcome measure - labelled Cerebrovascular Ischemia, major Hemorrhagic events or Death (CIHD) - and includes (i) occurrence of any stroke (including retinal infarction), (ii) new ischaemic lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, (iii) any major extracranial haemorrhage, (iv) any symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, (v) any new haemorrhagic lesion visible on paramagnetic-susceptible sequences and (vi) death.DiscussionAfter database closure, (i) central verification of cervical artery dissection diagnosis will be done by two experienced raters, (ii) adjudication of outcome events will be performed by independent adjudication committees, separately for clinical and imaging outcomes. The primary analysis will be done on the per protocol data set. The targeted sample size consists of 169 evaluable patients in the per protocol data set.ConclusionTREAT-CAD is testing the non-inferiority of Aspirin versus vitamin K antagonists treatment in patients with symptomatic cervical artery dissection by combined clinical and magnetic resonance imaging outcomes.

Dataset Information

Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Study selection

Data extraction

Data synthesis

Conclusion

Publications

Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets