Dataset Information

Dual antiplatelet therapy after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: pros and cons.

ABSTRACT: Dual antiplatelet therapy simultaneously blocks different platelet activation pathways and might thus be more potent at inhibiting platelet activation and more effective at reducing major ischemic vascular events compared to antiplatelet monotherapy. Aspirin plus clopidogrel dual therapy is now the standard therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and for those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, dual antiplatelet therapy carries an increased risk of bleeding. Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are generally older and likely to have a fragile cerebrovascular bed, which further increases the risk of systemic major bleeding events and intracranial hemorrhage. Clinical trials and meta-analyses suggest that in comparison to antiplatelet monotherapy, dual antiplatelet therapy initiated early after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA further reduces the rate of recurrent stroke and major vascular events without significantly increasing the rate of major bleeding events. In contrast, studies of long-term therapy in patients with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA have yielded inconsistent data regarding the benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy over monotherapy. However, the harm associated with major bleeding events, including intracranial hemorrhage, which is generally more disabling and more fatal than ischemic stroke, is likely to increase with dual antiplatelet therapy. Physicians should carefully assess the benefits and risks of dual antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet monotherapy when managing patients with ischemic stroke or TIA.

SUBMITTER: Hong KS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4101094 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dual antiplatelet therapy after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: pros and cons.

Hong Keun-Sik KS

Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) 20140703 3

Dual antiplatelet therapy simultaneously blocks different platelet activation pathways and might thus be more potent at inhibiting platelet activation and more effective at reducing major ischemic vascular events compared to antiplatelet monotherapy. Aspirin plus clopidogrel dual therapy is now the standard therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and for those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, dual antiplatelet therapy carries an increased risk of bleeding. Patien ...[more]

PMID: 25045370

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceInfarction patterns may serve as important imaging markers to assess the probability of stroke recurrence in transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke. However, it is unclear whether patients with different infarction patterns benefit differently from dual antiplatelet therapy.ObjectivesTo investigate whether infarction patterns can stratify the risk of recurrent stroke and whether the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin vs aspirin alone are consistent in different infarction patterns after TIA or minor stroke.Design, setting, and participantsIn this prespecified imaging substudy of the Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients With Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events (CHANCE) randomized clinical trial, a total of 1342 patients with noncardioembolic TIA or minor stroke at 45 sites of CHANCE from October 1, 2009, to July 30, 2012, were included in this substudy. The final analysis was conducted on July 30, 2016, and included 1089 patients with required magnetic resonance imaging sequences. Infarction patterns were grouped into multiple acute infarctions (MAIs), single acute infarction (SAI), and no acute infarction (NAI) according to diffusion-weighted imaging.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary and secondary efficacy outcomes were stroke recurrence and new clinical vascular event after 3 months, respectively. The safety outcome was moderate to severe bleeding risk after 3 months.ResultsAmong 1089 patients, the mean (SD) age was 63.1 (10.7) years and 731 patients (65%) were men. Patients with MAIs (hazard ratio [HR], 5.8; 95% CI, 2.2-15.1; P < .001) and SAI (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.5-10.5; P = .007) had higher risk of recurrent stroke than those with NAI after adjustment for potential confounders at 3-month follow-up. Stroke recurrence occurred in 15 (10.1%) and 25 (18.8%) of patients with MAIs administered clopidogrel plus aspirin and placebo plus aspirin, respectively (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.96; P = .04), 24 (8.9%) and 24 (8.5%) of patients with SAI administered clopidogrel plus aspirin and placebo plus aspirin, respectively (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-2.0; P = .71), and 3 (2.6%) and 2 (1.4%) of patients with NAI administered clopidogrel plus aspirin and placebo plus aspirin, respectively (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 0.3-11.1; P = .56), with P = .04 for treatment × infarction pattern interaction effect. Clopidogrel plus aspirin did not increase moderate to severe bleeding risk.Conclusions and relevanceInfarction patterns can efficiently stratify the risk of recurrent stroke within 3 months of noncardioembolic TIA or minor ischemic stroke. Patients with MAIs received the most pronounced clinical benefit from dual antiplatelet therapy without increasing the risk of moderate to severe bleeding. However, even if after dual antiplatelet treatment, patients with MAIs still had a risk of stroke recurrence as high as those with SAI.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00979589.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events despite current preventive therapies. The identification of insulin resistance as a risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction raised the possibility that pioglitazone, which improves insulin sensitivity, might benefit patients with cerebrovascular disease.MethodsIn this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3876 patients who had had a recent ischemic stroke or TIA to receive either pioglitazone (target dose, 45 mg daily) or placebo. Eligible patients did not have diabetes but were found to have insulin resistance on the basis of a score of more than 3.0 on the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction.ResultsBy 4.8 years, a primary outcome had occurred in 175 of 1939 patients (9.0%) in the pioglitazone group and in 228 of 1937 (11.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the pioglitazone group, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.93; P=0.007). Diabetes developed in 73 patients (3.8%) and 149 patients (7.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.17; P=0.52). Pioglitazone was associated with a greater frequency of weight gain exceeding 4.5 kg than was placebo (52.2% vs. 33.7%, P<0.001), edema (35.6% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001), and bone fracture requiring surgery or hospitalization (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=0.003).ConclusionsIn this trial involving patients without diabetes who had insulin resistance along with a recent history of ischemic stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke or myocardial infarction was lower among patients who received pioglitazone than among those who received placebo. Pioglitazone was also associated with a lower risk of diabetes but with higher risks of weight gain, edema, and fracture. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00091949.).

Dataset Information

Dual antiplatelet therapy after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: pros and cons.

Publications

Dual antiplatelet therapy after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: pros and cons.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets