Antithrombotic Therapy for Secondary Prevention in Patients with Non-Cardioembolic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Systematic Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tornyos D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8156895 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAntiplatelet drugs may prevent recurrent ischemic events after ischemic stroke but their relative effectiveness and harms still need to be clarified. Within this network meta-analysis we aimed to summarize the current evidence for using antiplatelet drugs for secondary stroke prevention.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL up to September 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing antiplatelet drugs for secondary stroke prevention were included. We did pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses using random-effects models. Primary outcomes were all strokes (ischemic or hemorrhagic) and all-cause mortality.ResultsThe review included 57 RCTs, 50 (n = 165,533 participants) provided data for the meta-analyses. Compared to placebo/no treatment, moderate to high-confidence evidence indicated that cilostazol, clopidogrel, dipyridamole + aspirin, ticagrelor, ticlopidine, and aspirin ≤ 150 mg/day significantly reduced the risk of all strokes (odds ratios, ORs and absolute risk difference, ARD): cilostazol 0.51 (95 % confidence interval, CI, 0.37 to 0.71; 3.6 % fewer), clopidogrel 0.63 (95 % CI, 0.49 to 0.79; 2.7 % fewer), dipyridamole + aspirin 0.65 (95 % CI, 0.55 to 0.78; 2.5 % fewer), ticagrelor 0.68 (95 % CI, 0.50 to 0.93; 2.3 % fewer), ticlopidine 0.74 (95 % CI 0.59 to 0.93; 1.9 % fewer), aspirin ≤ 150 mg/day 0.79 (95 % CI, 0.66 to 0.95; 1.5 % fewer). Aspirin > 150 mg/day and the combinations clopidogrel/aspirin, ticagrelor/aspirin, also decrease all strokes but increase the risk of hemorrhagic events. Only aspirin > 150 mg/day significantly reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.76 to 0.97; ARD 0.9 %, 95 %CI 1.5-0.2 % fewer, moderate confidence). Compared to aspirin ≤ 150 mg/day, clopidogrel significantly reduced the risk of all strokes, cardiovascular events, and intracranial hemorrhage outcomes. Cilostazol also appeared to provide advantages but data are limited to the Asian population.ConclusionsConsidering the benefits and harms ratio, cilostazol, clopidogrel, dipyridamole + aspirin, ticagrelor, ticlopidine, and aspirin ≤ 150 mg/day appear to be the best choices as antiplatelet drugs for secondary prevention of patients with ischemic stroke or TIA.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020159896 .
| S-EPMC8365925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antithrombotic therapy is a cornerstone of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) management and secondary stroke prevention. Since the first version of the Korean Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for stroke was issued in 2009, significant progress has been made in antithrombotic therapy for patients with AIS, including dual antiplatelet therapy in acute minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic stroke and early oral anticoagulation in AIS with atrial fibrillation. The evidence is widely accepted by stroke experts and has changed clinical practice. Accordingly, the CPG Committee of the Korean Stroke Society (KSS) decided to update the Korean Stroke CPG for antithrombotic therapy for AIS. The writing members of the CPG committee of the KSS reviewed recent evidence, including clinical trials and relevant literature, and revised recommendations. A total of 35 experts were invited from the KSS to reach a consensus on the revised recommendations. The current guideline update aims to assist healthcare providers in making well-informed decisions and improving the quality of acute stroke care. However, the ultimate treatment decision should be made using a holistic approach, considering the specific medical conditions of individual patients.
| S-EPMC8829490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Statins may prevent recurrent ischemic events after ischemic stroke. Determining which statin to use remains controversial. We aimed to summarize the evidence for the use of statins in secondary prevention for patients with ischemic stroke by comparing benefits and harms of various statins. METHODS:We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing statins in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL up to July 2017. Two authors extracted data and appraised risks of bias. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses (TSA) to compare statins versus placebo/no statin, and network meta-analyses using frequentist random-effects models to compare statins through indirect evidence. We used GRADE to rate the overall certainty of evidence. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and all strokes. Secondary outcomes were different types of strokes, cardiovascular events, and adverse events. RESULTS:We identified nine trials (10,741 patients). No head-to-head RCTs were found. The median follow-up period was 2.5?years. Statins did not seem to modify all stroke and all-cause mortality outcomes; they were associated with a decreased risk of ischemic stroke (odds ratio, OR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.70 to 0.93]; absolute risk difference, ARD, -?1.6% [95% CI, -?2.6 to -?0.6%]), ischemic stroke or TIA (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.87]; ARD, -?4.2% [95% CI, -?6.2 to -?2.1%]), and cardiovascular event (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.83]; ARD, -?5.4% [95% CI, -?6.8 to -?3.6%]), and did not seem to modify rhabdomyolysis, myalgia, or rise in creatine kinase. In the comparison of different statins, moderate- to high-quality evidence indicated that differences between pharmaceutical products seemed modest, with high doses (e.g., atorvastatin 80?mg/day and simvastatin 40?mg/day) associated with the greatest benefits. TSA excluded random error as a cause of the findings for ischemic stroke and cardiovascular event outcomes. Evidence for increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke was sensitive to the exclusion of the SPARCL trial. CONCLUSIONS:Evidence strongly suggests that statins are associated with a reduction in the absolute risk of ischemic strokes and cardiovascular events. Differences in effects among statins were modest, signaling potential therapeutic equivalence. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018079112.
| S-EPMC6436237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Biological response to clopidogrel prescribed after a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) has been little studied. The aim of our study (AAPIX) was to assess this response and investigate the agreement between different biological assays in revealing poor responders. METHODS:Patients hospitalized following a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and prescribed clopidogrel were consecutively included from September 2013 to November 2015 in the Stroke Center of Saint-Etienne Hospital. Blood was drawn after 5 to 8 days of standard-dose clopidogrel. Light transmission aggregometry (LTA) and flow cytometric assays, using vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein [VASP] and CD62P, were accomplished for all patients. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was performed for a poor clopidogrel-responder and for a patient with discordant platelet assay results (platelet reactivity index (PRI) >50% and maximum platelet aggregation <70%), after activation with adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 10 µM. RESULTS:72 patients were included. According to LTA, VASP assay and CD62P test results, 65%, 71% and 0% of patients, respectively, had a low response to clopidogrel, indicating poor agreement between these assays. Images of ADP-activated platelet samples from a patient manifesting a low response to clopidogrel and from a patient with discordant platelet assay results showed an ultrastructural pattern typical of activation and a state of slight activation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Platelet function results obtained using different assays for patients having experienced a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA were discordant. Transmission electron microscopy could be useful in certain clinical contexts when platelet function assay results disagree.
| S-EPMC6789282 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and non-valvular atrial fibrillation have a high risk of recurrent stroke and other vascular events. The aim of this guideline is to provide recommendations on antithrombotic medication for secondary prevention of stroke and other vascular outcomes in these patients. The working group identified questions and outcomes, graded evidence, and developed recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) standard operating procedure for guidelines. The guideline was reviewed and approved by the ESO guideline board and the ESO executive committee. In patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of recurrence over antiplatelets or no antithrombotic treatment. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are preferred over vitamin K antagonists because they have a lower risk of major bleeding and death. Recommendations are weak regarding timing of treatment, (re-)starting oral anticoagulants in patients with previous intracerebral haemorrhage, and treatment in specific patient subgroups of those of older age, with cognitive impairment, renal failure or small vessel disease, because of a lack of strong evidence. In conclusion, for patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are the preferred treatment for secondary prevention of recurrent stroke or thromboembolism. Further research is required to determine the best timing for initiating oral anticoagulants after an acute ischemic stroke, whether or not oral anticoagulants should be (re)started in patients with a history of intracerebral haemorrhage, and the best secondary preventive treatment in specific subgroups.
| S-EPMC6960695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recurrent vascular events remain a major source of morbidity and mortality after stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). The IRIS Trial is evaluating an approach to secondary prevention based on the established association between insulin resistance and increased risk for ischemic vascular events. Specifically, IRIS will test the effectiveness of pioglitazone, an insulin-sensitizing drug of the thiazolidinedione class, for reducing the risk for stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) among insulin resistant, nondiabetic patients with a recent ischemic stroke or TIA.Eligible patients for IRIS must have had insulin resistance defined by a Homeostasis Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance > 3.0 without meeting criteria for diabetes. Within 6 months of the index stroke or TIA, patients were randomly assigned to pioglitazone (titrated from 15 to 45 mg/d) or matching placebo and followed for up to 5 years. The primary outcome is time to stroke or MI. Secondary outcomes include time to stroke alone, acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, cognitive decline, and all-cause mortality. Enrollment of 3,876 participants from 179 sites in 7 countries was completed in January 2013. Participant follow-up will continue until July 2015.The IRIS Trial will determine whether treatment with pioglitazone improves cardiovascular outcomes of nondiabetic, insulin-resistant patients with stroke or TIA. Results are expected in early 2016.
| S-EPMC4254508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/aimCurrent guidelines recommend transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and ambulatory rhythm monitoring following ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) of undetermined cause for identifying cardioembolic sources (CES). Due to ongoing controversies about this routine strategy, we evaluated its yield in a real-world setting.MethodsIn a tertiary medical center, we retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients with ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause, who (after standard work-up) underwent TTE, ambulatory rhythm monitoring, or both. CES were classified as major if probably related to ischemic events and warranting a change of therapy.ResultsBetween January 2014 and December 2017, 674 patients had ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause. Of all 484 patients (71.8%) who underwent TTE, 9 (1.9%) had a major CES. However, 7 of them had already been identified for cardiac evaluation due to new major electrocardiographic abnormalities or cardiac symptoms. Thus, only 2 patients (0.4%) truly benefitted from unselected TTE screening. Ambulatory rhythm monitoring was performed in 411 patients (61.0%) and revealed AF in 10 patients (2.4%).ConclusionDetecting a major CES is essential because appropriate treatment lowers the risk of recurrent stroke. Nonetheless, in this real-world study that aimed at routine use of TTE and ambulatory rhythm monitoring in patients with ischemic stroke or TIA of undetermined cause, the prevalence of major CES was low. Most patients with major CES on TTE already had an indication for referral to a cardiologist, suggesting that major CES might also have been identified with a much more selective use of TTE.
| S-EPMC7989814 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients 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. METHODS:In 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. RESULTS:By 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). CONCLUSIONS:In 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.).
| S-EPMC4887756 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with minor stroke or transient ischemic attacks have an increased risk of future strokes. These patients are often discharged home with limited specialized follow-up, although close to half of them experience cognitive deficits. Simple encouragements to avoid smoking, be physically active, and to take preventive medication are often insufficient to ensure adherence and more comprehensive interventions are needed to support the patients in adapting healthy behaviour. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and potential effect of an early initiated, patient-centred intervention to patients with minor stroke or transient ischemic attacks targeting smoking, physical activity, and medication adherence, in a randomized, controlled pilot trial.MethodsHospitalized patients were randomized to usual care or an intervention consisting of health behavioural counselling based on the 5A's model, telephone follow-up (4 and 8 weeks), and monitoring of physical activity. Follow-up time was 12 weeks. Feasibility was on the following domains: eligibility, acceptance, demand and practicality, adherence, attrition, and implementation and integration.ResultsForty patients of 84 potentially eligible were randomized to the two treatment arms (20 intervention/20 usual care). Thirty-two completed the 12-week follow-up, while 8 were either excluded or lost to follow-up. With few changes, the intervention was feasible and possible to deliver according to the protocol.ConclusionIt was possible to identify relevant patients who could potentially benefit from a behavioural intervention, recruit and randomize them early after admission and retain most participants in the study until follow-up and derive statistical estimates to guide the design of large-scale randomized controlled trials.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03648957 . Registered 28 August 2018.
| S-EPMC10958836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent years have seen new evidence on the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention. We updated a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating dual antiplatelet versus monotherapy for patients with acute non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke (IS) or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).We searched PubMed and identified randomised controlled trials evaluating dual antiplatelet versus monotherapy for acute non-cardioembolic IS or TIA within 3 days of ictus up to May 2018. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI were calculated using random effects models. Clinical endpoints included stroke recurrence, composite vascular events and major bleeding.18 randomised controlled trials including 15?515 patients were pooled in the meta-analysis. When compared with monotherapy among patients with acute IS or TIA, dual antiplatelet therapy reduced the risk of stroke recurrence (RR 0.69; 95%?CI 0.61 to 0.78; p<0.001) and composite vascular events (RR 0.72; 95%?CI 0.64 to 0.80; p<0.001). Dual therapy was associated with a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.77; 95%?CI 1.09 to 2.87; p=0.02) when all trial data were combined. However, when all previous trials before the completion of the POINT trial were analysed, dual antiplatelet versus monotherapy was not associated with a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.46; 95%?CI 0.77 to 2.75; p=0.25).Among patients with acute non-cardioembolic IS or TIA within 3 days of ictus, dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduction in stroke recurrence, and composite vascular events, when compared with monotherapy. However, a significant increase in the risk of major bleeding was observed.
| S-EPMC6047341 | biostudies-literature