Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Antiplatelet Therapies in Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Clopidogrel monotherapy is guideline-recommended in symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD). The advent of new antithrombotic strategies prompts an updated analysis of available evidence on antiplatelet therapy for PAD.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL through January 2019 for randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing antiplatelet therapies as monotherapy, dual therapy, or combination with anticoagulants. Efficacy (major adverse cardiovascular events, acute or chronic limb ischaemia, vascular amputation, peripheral revascularisation) and safety (all-cause mortality and overall bleeding) outcomes were evaluated via Bayesian network meta-analyses.

Results

We analysed 26 randomised controlled trials. Clopidogrel (hazard ratio, HR, 0.78; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.65-0.93) and ticagrelor (HR 0.80; 95% CrI 0.65-0.98) significantly reduced major adverse cardiovascular events risk compared with aspirin. No significant difference was observed for dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin. Vorapaxar significantly reduced limb ischaemia and revascularisation compared with placebo, while dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin showed a trend for reduced risk of amputation compared with aspirin (risk ratio 0.68; 95% CrI 0.43-1.04). For all-cause mortality, picotamide, vorapaxar, dipyridamole with aspirin, and ticlopidine showed a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality vs aspirin. Clopidogrel and ticagrelor showed similar overall bleeding risk vs aspirin, while dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin significantly increased bleeding risk.

Conclusion

This updated network meta-analysis confirms that clopidogrel significantly decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin, without increasing bleeding risk. Clopidogrel should remain a mainstay of PAD treatment, at least in patients at higher bleeding risk.

SUBMITTER: De Carlo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8573731 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe guidelines on antithrombotic treatment in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing peripheral revascularization of the lower extremities were developed based on heterogeneous trials, assessing various dose regimens and recruiting patients who were subjected to different revascularization procedures.ObjectiveTo compare efficacy and safety of treatments used in patients with PAD undergoing peripheral revascularization accounting for between-trial heterogeneity and large dispersion of the quality of evidence.MethodsA systematic literature review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adult patients with PAD receiving antithrombotics was conducted until January 2020. Hazard ratios (HR) were pooled using Bayesian network meta-analysis. The estimated between-treatment effects were presented as HR together with 95% credible intervals. The base case analysis included studies recruiting patients following recent peripheral revascularization, who received treatment regimens administered within the recommended therapeutic window, while a sensitivity scenario included all identified trials.ResultsThirteen RCTs were identified (8 RCTs enrolled patients following peripheral revascularization and 5 RCTs regardless of the previous revascularization). Five trials, recruiting an overall of 8349 patients, were considered for the base case analysis. Of those, 6564 patients were recruited in the VOYAGER PAD trial comparing rivaroxaban plus aspirin (RIV plus ASA) versus ASA. RIV plus ASA was associated with a lower risk of repeated peripheral revascularization versus ASA monotherapy (HR = 0.88 [0.79, 0.99]), however having a trend towards an increased rate of major bleeding (HR = 1.43 [0.98, 2.11]). There was no evidence for differences between RIV plus ASA and dual antiplatelet therapy and vitamin K antagonists plus ASA. Similar results were observed in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsRIV plus ASA is associated with reduced risk of revascularization compared with ASA monotherapy, but the evidence for other comparators, in particular antiplatelet regimens, was insufficient to guide treatment decisions and highlights the challenge in establishing the magnitude of comparative efficacy using existing RCTs.

Project description:Background: Stroke is currently the second-leading cause of death just behind ischaemic heart disease. Drug therapy is currently the standard of care for patients with symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis (sICAS). Stenting is an important treatment for the prevention and treatment of ischemic stroke. It has been suggested that vertebral artery stenting might reduce this risk, but operation-related complications limit the application of stenting in the treatment of ischemic stroke. The differences in the safety and efficacy of stenting combined with drugs and drugs alone in the treatment of sICAS are unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of both treatment modalities on the prognosis of patients with sICAS through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: The Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM, DUXIU) and English databases (Pubmed, Embase, Ovid_medline, Cochrane library, Web of science)were searched to identify all studies describing sICAS. The “Risk of Bias Assessment” tool and the “Jadad Scale” provided by the Cochrane Collaboration were used to evaluate the risk of bias and quality of the collected literature. The risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined using Stata statistical software version 14.0. Results: A total of 11 studies were included, comprising a total of 1,915 patients. The combined results of the study showed no significant difference between the incidence of transient cerebral ischemia (TIA)and stroke in patients with sICAS treated with drugs in combination with stents versus drugs alone. The incidence of death or stroke, cerebral haemorrhage, disabling stroke or death was significantly higher in patients receiving stent-combined drug therapy versus drug therapy alone for sICAS. Conclusion: Studies suggest that stenting combined with medication for patients with sICAS may increase the incidence of death or stroke, cerebral haemorrhage, stroke or death, but has no significant effect on the incidence of TIA and stroke. The studies report inadequate and conflicting data and therefore the safety and efficacy of stenting for sICAS should be interpreted with caution. Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022377090, identifier CRD42022377090

Project description:ImportanceDespite advances in the understanding of dietary therapies in children with drug-resistant epilepsy, no quantitative comparison exists between different dietary interventions.ObjectiveTo evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of various dietary therapies in childhood drug-resistant epilepsy.Data sourcesSystematic review and network meta-analysis (frequentist) of studies in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Ovid published from inception to April 2022 using the search terms ketogenic diet, medium chain triglyceride diet, modified Atkins diet, low glycemic index therapy, and refractory epilepsy.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials comparing different dietary therapies (ketogenic diet, modified Atkins diet, and low glycemic index therapy) with each other or care as usual in childhood drug-resistant epilepsy were included. Abstract, title, and full text were screened independently by 2 reviewers.Data extraction and synthesisData extraction was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the study quality. Effect sizes were calculated as odds ratio with 95% CI using random-effects model. The hierarchy of competing interventions was defined using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.Main outcomes and measuresShort-term (≤3 months) 50% or higher and 90% or higher reduction in seizure frequency and treatment withdrawal due to adverse events were the primary efficacy and safety outcomes.ResultsOf 2158 citations, 12 randomized clinical trials (907 patients) qualified for inclusion. In the short term, all dietary interventions were more efficacious than care as usual for 50% or higher seizure reduction (low glycemic index therapy: odds ratio [OR], 24.7 [95% CI, 5.3-115.4]; modified Atkins diet: OR, 11.3 [95% CI, 5.1-25.1]; ketogenic diet: OR, 8.6 [95% CI, 3.7-20.0]), while ketogenic diet (OR, 6.5 [95% CI, 2.3-18.0]) and modified Atkins diet (OR, 5.1 [95% CI, 2.2-12.0]) were better than care as usual for seizure reduction of 90% or higher. However, adverse event-related discontinuation rates were significantly higher for ketogenic diet (OR, 8.6 [95% CI, 1.8-40.6]) and modified Atkins diet (OR, 6.5 [95% CI, 1.4-31.2]) compared with care as usual. Indirectly, there was no significant difference between dietary therapies in efficacy and safety outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that all dietary therapies are effective in the short term. However, modified Atkins diet had better tolerability, higher probability for 50% or higher seizure reduction, and comparable probability for 90% or higher seizure reduction and may be a sounder option than ketogenic diet. Direct head-to-head comparison studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Project description:BackgroundHigh-quality evidence from trials directly comparing single antiplatelet therapies in symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) to dual antiplatelet therapies or acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) plus low-dose rivaroxaban is lacking. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis on the effectiveness of all antithrombotic regimens studied in PAD.MethodsA systematic search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleedings. Secondary endpoints were major adverse limb events (MALE) and acute limb ischaemia (ALI). For each outcome, a frequentist network meta-analysis was used to compare relative risks (RRs) between medication and ASA. ASA was the universal comparator since a majority of studies used ASA as in the reference group.ResultsTwenty-four randomized controlled trials were identified including 48,759 patients. With regard to reducing MACE, clopidogrel [RR 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.93], ticagrelor (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97), ASA plus ticagrelor (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.97), and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.93) were more effective than ASA, and equally effective to one another. As compared to ASA, major bleedings occurred more frequently with vitamin K antagonists, rivaroxaban, ASA plus vitamin K antagonists, and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban. All regimens were similar to ASA concerning MALE, while ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban was more effective in preventing ALI (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.80). Subgroup analysis in patients undergoing peripheral revascularization revealed that ≥ 3 months after intervention, evidence of benefit regarding clopidogrel, ticagrelor, and ASA plus ticagrelor was lacking, while ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban was more effective in preventing MACE (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.97) and MALE (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.97) compared to ASA. ASA plus clopidogrel was not superior to ASA in preventing MACE ≥ 3 months after revascularization. Evidence regarding antithrombotic treatment strategies within 3 months after a peripheral intervention was lacking.ConclusionClopidogrel, ticagrelor, ASA plus ticagrelor, and ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban are superior to ASA monotherapy and equally effective to one another in preventing MACE in PAD. Of these four therapies, only ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban provides a higher risk of major bleedings. More than 3 months after peripheral vascular intervention, ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban is superior in preventing MACE and MALE compared to ASA but again at the cost of a higher risk of bleeding, while other treatment regimens show non-superiority. Based on the current evidence, clopidogrel may be considered the antithrombotic therapy of choice for most PAD patients, while in patients who underwent a peripheral vascular intervention, ASA plus low-dose rivaroxaban could be considered for the long-term (> 3 months) prevention of MACE and MALE.

Project description:IntroductionSaphenous vein graft (SVG) is the most common conduit used for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. Unfortunately, SVG are associated with poor long-term patency rates; a significant predictor of re-operation rates and survival. As such, medical therapy to prevent SVG narrowing or occlusion is of paramount importance. Aspirin (ASA) monotherapy is the standard of care after CABG, to improve long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and graft patency. Benefits of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) have not been well established in all CABG patients. We present a protocol for a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the effects of various antiplatelet therapy regimens on SVG patency, mortality, and bleeding among adult patients following CABG.MethodsWe will search CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL ACPJC, and grey literature sources (AHA, ACC, ESC, and CCC conference proceedings, ISRCTN Register, and WHO ICTRP) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which fit our criteria. RCTs that evaluate different antiplatelet regimens at least 3-months after CABG and have any of SVG patency, mortality, MACE, and major bleeding as outcomes will be selected. We will perform title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction independently and in duplicate. Two independent reviewers will also assess risk of bias (ROB) for each study, as well as evaluate quality of evidence using the GRADE framework. We will use R to perform the NMA and use low-dose ASA as reference within our network. We will report results as odds ratios with confidence intervals for direct comparisons, and credible intervals for indirect or mixed comparisons. We will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to estimate the ranking of interventions.DiscussionGiven the limited direct comparison of various antiplatelet regimens, a network approach is ideal to clarify the optimum antiplatelet therapy after CABG. We hope that our NMA will be the largest quantitative synthesis evaluating antiplatelet regimens among patients requiring CABG. It should inform clinicians and guideline developers in selecting the most effective and safest antiplatelet regimen.Systematic Review registration: International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)-CRD42019127695.

Project description:There is a lack of consensus regarding which type of antiplatelet agent should be used in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and little is known on the advantages and disadvantages of dual antiplatelet therapy. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing different antiplatelet drugs (Aspirin, Ticlopidine, Clopidogrel, Ticagrelor, Cilostazol, Picotamide and Vorapaxar as monotherapies or in combination with aspirin) in PAD patients (PROSPERO public database; CRD42014010299).We collated evidence from previous relevant meta-analyses and searched online databases. Primary efficacy endpoints were: (1) the composite rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; including vascular deaths, non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal stroke), and (2) the rate of major leg amputations. The primary safety endpoint was the rate of severe bleeding events. Bayesian models were employed for multiple treatment comparisons and risk-stratified hierarchies of comparative efficacy were produced to aid medical decision making. Number-Needed-to-Treat (NNT) and Number-Needed-to-Harm (NNH) are reported in case of significant results. We analyzed 49 RCTs comprising 34,518 patients with 88,358 person-years of follow-up with placebo as reference treatment. Aspirin, Cilostazol, Vorapaxar and Picotamide were ineffective in reducing MACE. A significant MACE reduction was noted with Ticagrelor plus aspirin (RR: 0.67; 95%CrI: 0.46-0.96, NNT = 66), Clopidogrel (RR: 0.72; 95%CrI: 0.58-0.91, NNT = 80), Ticlopidine (RR: 0.75; 95%CrI: 0.58-0.96, NNT = 87), and Clopidogrel plus aspirin (RR: 0.78; 95%CrI: 0.61-0.99, NNT = 98). Dual antiplatelet therapy with Clopidogrel plus aspirin significantly reduced major amputations following leg revascularization (RR: 0.68; 95%CrI: 0.46-0.99 compared to aspirin, NNT = 94). The risk of severe bleeding was significantly higher with Ticlopidine (RR: 5.03; 95%CrI: 1.23-39.6, NNH = 25), Vorapaxar (RR: 1.80; 95%CrI: 1.22-2.69, NNH = 130), and Clopidogrel plus aspirin (RR: 1.48; 95%CrI: 1.05-2.10, NNH = 215). Clopidogrel monotherapy showed the most favourable benefit-harm profile (79% cumulative rank probability best and 77% cumulative rank probability safest). In conclusion, Clopidogrel should be the indicated antiplatelet agent in PAD patients. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and Clopidogrel can reduce the rate of major leg amputations following revascularization, but carries a slightly higher risk of severe bleeding.