Double or triple antithrombotic therapy after coronary stenting and atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Long-term risks and benefits of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation patients with cancer: A report from the GLORIA-AF registry

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and concomitant cancer can be challenging due to the significantly increased risk of both embolism and bleeding. Moreover, the benefits and risks of vitamin K antagonists (VKA, eg. warfarin) versus non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in such patients are less well understood.

METHODS

From the prospective, global, multi-centered Global Registry on Long-Term Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (GLORIA-AF), we characterized these patients according to their history of prior cancer when enrolled. All patients received anticoagulant therapy. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism. The secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, stroke, major bleeding and thromboembolism during the 3 years follow-up period. Cox regression analyses were used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and confidence interval (CI) following propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Overall, among 16,700 patients enrolled in Phase III in GLORIA-AF, 1725 (10%) patients had concomitant cancer(s) at enrolment. After PSM, the primary outcome occurred in 250 (14.8%) of patients with cancer(s) and 160 (9.3%) without cancer(s) (HR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.33-1.97], p < .001) during the 3 years follow-up period. The risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients with cancer(s) versus non- cancer(s) (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.37-2.12], p < .001). In patients with cancer(s), after PSM, the use of NOACs was associated with reduced risk of the primary outcome compared with that of VKA (HR, .69 [95% CI, .49-.99], p = .043), as well as a lower risk of thromboembolism (HR, .49 [95% CI, .24-1.00], p = .051), but the risk of major bleeding was not significantly different (HR, .87 [95% CI, .48-1.56], p = .635). Subgroup analysis in patients with cancers showed a reduced risk of major bleeding with NOACs compared with VKA (HR, .18 [95% CI, .04-.8], p = .024) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). For the main cancer subtypes (genitourinary, breast, gastrointestinal, haematological and skin), the trends for the risk of primary outcome were consistently favouring NOACs compared with VKA without any significant interaction among these five cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer is a common comorbidity in patients with AF and is associated with increased risk of composite of all-cause mortality and thromboembolism. Compared with VKA, NOACs was associated with a lower risk of composite events and showed an advantage in lower risk of thromboembolism, as well as a reduced risk of major bleeding when CAD was also present.

Advances in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Bridging Gaps in Diagnosis and Treatment

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) have long posed a formidable challenge to cardiovascular care, despite significant advancements in both understanding and treatment over the last few decades [...].

Temporary omission of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: rationale and design of the WOEST-3 randomised trial

The optimal antithrombotic management of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who require oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear. Current guidelines recommend dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT; OAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor - preferably clopidogrel) after a short course of triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT; DAT plus aspirin). Although DAT reduces bleeding risk compared to TAT, this is counterbalanced by an increase in ischaemic events. Aspirin provides early ischaemic benefit, but TAT is associated with an increased haemorrhagic burden; therefore, we propose a 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; aspirin plus P2Y12 inhibitor) strategy post-PCI, temporarily omitting OAC. The study aims to compare bleeding and ischaemic risk between a 30-day DAPT strategy following PCI and a guideline-directed therapy in AF patients requiring OAC. WOEST-3 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04436978) is an investigator-initiated, international, open-label, randomised controlled trial (RCT). AF patients requiring OAC who have undergone successful PCI will be randomised within 72 hours after PCI to guideline-directed therapy (edoxaban plus P2Y12 inhibitor plus limited duration of aspirin) or a 30-day DAPT strategy (P2Y12 inhibitor plus aspirin, immediately discontinuing OAC) followed by DAT (edoxaban plus P2Y12 inhibitor). With a sample size of 2,000 patients, this trial is powered to assess both superiority for major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding and non-inferiority for a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism or stent thrombosis. In summary, the WOEST-3 trial is the first RCT temporarily omitting OAC in AF patients, comparing a 30-day DAPT strategy with guideline-directed therapy post-PCI to reduce bleeding events without hampering efficacy.

Antithrombotic Therapy Optimization in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

The antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) poses numerous challenges. Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT), which combines dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with oral anticoagulation (OAC), provides anti-ischemic protection but increases the risk of bleeding. Therefore, TAT is generally limited to a short phase (1 week) after PCI, followed by aspirin withdrawal and continuation of 6-12 months of dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT), comprising OAC plus clopidogrel, followed by OAC alone. This pharmacological approach has been shown to mitigate bleeding risk while preserving adequate anti-ischemic efficacy. However, the decision-making process remains complex in elderly patients and those with co-morbidities, significantly influencing ischemic and bleeding risk. In this review, we discuss the available evidence in this area from randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses for post-procedural antithrombotic therapies in patients with non-valvular AF undergoing PCI.

Individualization of Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Coronary Stenting: A Comprehensive, Evidence-Based Review

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), comprising aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, is the cornerstone of post-percutaneous coronary intervention treatment to prevent stent thrombosis and reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular events. The selection of an optimal DAPT regimen, considering the interplay of various antiplatelet agents, patient profiles, and procedural characteristics, remains an evolving challenge. Traditionally, a standard duration of 12 months has been recommended for DAPT in most patients. While contemporary guidelines provide general frameworks, DAPT modulation with longer or shorter treatment courses followed by aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy are evolving towards an individualized strategy to optimize the balance between efficacy and safety. This review comprehensively examines the current landscape of DAPT strategies after coronary stenting, with a focus on emerging evidence for treatment individualization.

Antithrombotic Management in AF Patients Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A European Perspective

AF is a highly prevalent disease, often requiring long-term oral anticoagulation to prevent stroke or systemic embolism. Coronary artery disease, which is common among AF patients, is often referred for myocardial revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which requires dual antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of stent-related complications. The overlap of AF and PCI is a clinical conundrum, especially in the early post-procedural period, when both long-term oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy are theoretically indicated as a triple antithrombotic therapy. However, stacking drugs is not a desirable option because of the increased bleeding risk. Several strategies have been investigated to mitigate this concern, including shortening triple antithrombotic therapy duration and switching to a dual antithrombotic regimen. This review analyses the mechanisms underlying thrombotic complications in AF-PCI, summarises evidence surrounding antithrombotic therapy regimens and reports and comments on the latest European guidelines.

Dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: the prospective multicentre WOEST 2 Study

BACKGROUND

For patients on oral anticoagulants (OAC) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), European guidelines have recently changed their recommendations to dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT; P2Y₁₂ inhibitor and OAC) without aspirin.

AIMS

The prospective WOEST 2 registry was designed to obtain contemporary real-world data on antithrombotic regimens and related outcomes after PCI in patients with an indication for OAC.

METHODS

In this analysis, we compare DAT (P2Y₁₂ inhibitor and OAC) to triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT; aspirin, P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, and OAC) on thrombotic and bleeding outcomes after one year. Clinically relevant bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium classification (BARC) grade 2, 3, or 5; major bleeding as BARC grade 3 or 5. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, ischaemic stroke, and transient ischaemic attack.

RESULTS

A total of 1,075 patients were included between 2014 and 2021. Patients used OAC for atrial fibrillation (93.6%) or mechanical heart valve prosthesis (4.7%). Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC) were prescribed in 53.1% and vitamin K antagonists in 46.9% of patients. At discharge, 60.9% received DAT, and 39.1% TAT. DAT was associated with less clinically relevant and similar major bleeding (16.8% vs 23.4%; p<0.01 and 7.6% vs 7.7%, not significant), compared to TAT. The difference in MACCE between the two groups was not statistically significant (12.4% vs 9.7%; p=0.17). Multivariable adjustment and propensity score matching confirmed these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual antithrombotic therapy is associated with a substantially lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding without a statistically significant penalty in ischaemic events.

The optimal duration of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) consisting of anticoagulant and dual antiplatelet agents is a core treatment for prevention of ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), however, due to bleeding risks, the optimal duration of TAT is unclear.

METHODS

We searched the database and conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the optimal duration of TAT for patients with AF and ACS or undergoing PCI by comparing the probability of ischemic and bleeding outcomes for four different TAT durations.

RESULTS

After analyzing data from 12,329 patients, we determined that short-term TAT is advantageous to varying degrees for reducing bleeding events. While long-term TAT has a lower stent thrombosis risk than short-term TAT, the four strategies have comparable outcomes for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stroke, all-cause death, and myocardial infarction events. Based on Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values, no treatment duration has an absolute advantage for reducing these ischemic events.

CONCLUSION

Long-term TAT may be reasonable for patients at a high risk for stent thrombosis, but short-term TAT is associated with fewer bleeding complications, and there are no significant differences in most ischemic events across treatment durations. Overall, our results indicate that short-term TAT should be the default strategy unless there is a high risk of stent thrombosis that warrants appropriate prolongation of TAT duration.

Optimizing the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the most common procedures performed in medicine. However, its net benefit among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is less well established than in the general population. The prevalence of patients suffering from both CAD and CKD is high, and is likely to increase in the coming years. Planning the adequate management of this group of patients is crucial to improve their outcome after PCI. This starts with proper preparation before the procedure, the use of all available means to reduce contrast during the procedure, and the implementation of modern strategies such as radial access and drug-eluting stents. At the end of the procedure, personalized antithrombotic therapy for the patient's specific characteristics is advisable to account for the elevated ischemic and bleeding risk of these patients.

Hospital factor and prognosis of COVID-19 in New York City, the United States of America: insights from a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

April 22nd, 2020, New York City (NYC) was the epicenter of the pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the US with differences of death rates among its 5 boroughs. We aimed to investigate the difference in mortality associated with hospital factors (teaching versus community hospital) in NYC.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We obtained medical records of 6509 hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 from the Mount Sinai Health System including 4 teaching hospitals in Manhattan and 2 community hospitals located outside of Manhattan (Queens and Brooklyn) retrospectively. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with stabilized weights was performed to adjust for differences in the baseline characteristics of patients initially presenting to teaching or community hospitals, and those who were transferred from community hospitals to teaching hospitals.

RESULTS

Among 6509 patients, 4653 (72.6%) were admitted in teaching hospitals, 1462 (22.8%) were admitted in community hospitals, and 293 (4.6%) were originally admitted in community and then transferred into teaching hospitals. Patients in community hospitals had higher mortality (42.5%) than those in teaching hospitals (17.6%) or those transferred from community to teaching hospitals (23.5%, P < 0.001). After IPTW-adjustment, when compared to patients cared for at teaching hospitals, the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of mortality were as follows: community hospitals 2.47 (2.03-2.99); transfers 0.80 (0.58-1.09)).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted to community hospitals had higher mortality than those admitted to teaching hospitals.

Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased risk for coronary artery disease (CAD). After percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the antithrombotic therapy consists of a combination of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents to reduce the ischemic and thromboembolic risk, at the cost of increased bleeding events. In the past few years, several randomized clinical trials involving over 12,000 patients have been conducted to compare the safety of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in association with a single- or double-antiplatelet agent, in the so-called dual- (DAT) or triple-antithrombotic therapy (TAT). These studies and several meta-analyses showed a consistent benefit for reducing bleeding events of DAT over TAT and of DOAC over VKA, without concerns about ischemic endpoints, except for a trend for increased stent thrombosis risk. The present paper examines current international guidelines’ recommendations and reviews clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies conducted on AF patients treated with DAT or TAT after PCI for acute coronary syndromes.

The risk of stent thrombosis of dual antithrombotic therapy for patients who require oral anticoagulant undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: insights of a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Recent meta-analyses investigating dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) versus triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) among patients who require oral anticoagulants especially with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) raised the concern of stent thrombosis (ST) and myocardial infarction (MI), however, these meta-analyses did not include all randomized trials who require oral anticoagulants. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of DAT versus TAT in these patients undergoing PCI. Our data showed the risk of ST was not significantly different in DAT vs. TAT (HR [95%CI]: 1.50 [0.97-2.34], p = .07; I² = 0%) and MI (HR [95%CI]: 1.17 [0.95-1.45], p = .14; I² = 0%).

Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants and Risk of Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation with or without Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Meta-Analysis

The study aimed to assess the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and major adverse cardiac events during non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) compared to warfarin therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), both treated and not treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). In a systematic search, we selected eight randomized clinical trials with a total of 81,943 patients. Dabigatran, compared to warfarin, significantly increased the risk of MI (relative risk [RR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.14-1.67), while the FXa inhibitors' effect did not differ significantly from warfarin (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.09). The RR comparison between analyzed subgroups (dabigatran vs. FXa inhibitors) showed a significant difference (Chi2 = 9.51, df = 1, p = 0.002). In a network meta-analysis, dabigatran 110 mg b.i.d. increased the risk of MI compared to warfarin, apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban. Also, dabigatran 150 mg b.i.d. increased the risk of MI compared to warfarin, apixaban, and rivaroxaban. Moreover, we tried to estimate the treatment ranking of the best therapy for MI prevention in patients with AF treated with PCI. Rivaroxaban had a 90% probability of being ranked the best therapy for MI prevention, whereas dabigatran 110 mg had an 8.2% probability. Dabigatran 150 mg was the most effective in stroke prevention (94% probability). Each NOAC is associated with a different risk of MI. Furthermore, we should consider FXa inhibitors as the first line NOACs in AF and coronary artery disease patients. PROSPERO ID CRD42020179808.

Prognosis of Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing PCI According to Anticoagulants and Antiplatelet Agents

There are limited data evaluating conformation of antithrombotic therapy usage to the guideline recommendations. We investigated clinical trends and prognoses of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) according to anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents beyond 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We analyzed the records of patients with AF who underwent PCI using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The safety outcome was bleeding complications. Of 4193 participants, 81.6% received antiplatelet therapy, whereas 27.3% had oral anticoagulant (OAC)-based therapy at 18 months after PCI. The dominant therapy was dual antiplatelet therapy (37.2%), and only 3.3% of participants had OAC monotherapy. At the 1-year follow-up, the incidence of MACE was significantly lower among those receiving a combination of OAC and single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) than among those receiving OAC monotherapy (4.78% vs. 9.42%, p = 0.017). Bleeding complication events (5.01% vs. 5.80%, p = 0.587) did not differ between the groups. In clinical practice, most patients with AF who underwent PCI continued to receive antiplatelet agents beyond 1-year post-PCI. OAC with SAPT seemed to be more effective than OAC monotherapy, without a difference in safety.

An update on antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients in long-term ambulatory setting after percutaneous coronary intervention: where do we go from here?

INTRODUCTION

In the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it is unclear which combination of antithrombotic drugs is preferable and which is the optimal duration of treatment.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the available evidence in this area resulting from single studies and meta-analyses. In the absence of direct head-to-head comparisons between different non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC), the authors review the available studies with NOACS in these patients and derived indirect comparisons.

EXPERT OPINION

In patients with AF who undergo PCI, a dual antithrombotic strategy which includes a NOAC plus single antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor (preferably clopidogrel) should be considered as the preferred treatment option in most cases. Oral anticoagulation associated with dual antiplatelet therapy (triple antithrombotic therapy) should be offered for no longer than 30 days to patients with very high thrombotic and low hemorrhagic risk. It is unclear whether the dual antithrombotic strategy should be continued beyond 12 months in patients at high risk of thrombotic events. Additional data from adequately powered controlled studies are needed to support the long-term efficacy of this strategy and to establish the best patient-tailored approach in this complex scenario.

Edoxaban in atrial fibrillation patients with percutaneous coronary intervention by acute or chronic coronary syndrome presentation: a pre-specified analysis of the ENTRUST-AF PCI trial

Aims 

To compare the safety and efficacy of edoxaban combined with P2Y₁₂ inhibition following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or chronic coronary syndrome (CCS).

Methods and results 

In this pre-specified sub-analysis of the ENTRUST-AF PCI trial, participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to edoxaban- or vitamin K antagonist (VKA)-based strategy and randomization was stratified by ACS (edoxaban n = 388, VKA n = 389) vs. CCS (edoxaban n = 363, VKA = 366). Participants received edoxaban 60 mg once-daily plus a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor for 12 months, or VKA combined with a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor and aspirin 100 mg (for 1–12 months). The primary bleeding endpoint at 12 months occurred in 59 (15.2%) vs. 79 (20.3%) ACS patients [hazard ratio (HR): 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59–1.02, P = 0.063], and in 69 (19.0%) vs. 73 (19.9%) CCS patients (HR: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.68–1.31, P = 0.708) with edoxaban- and VKA-based therapy, respectively [P for interaction (P-int) = 0.2741]. The main secondary endpoint (composite of CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolic events, or definite stent thrombosis) in ACS patients was 33 (8.5%) vs. 28 (7.2%) (HR: 1.16, 95%CI: 0.70–1.92), compared with 16 (4.4%) vs. 18 (4.9%) (HR: 0.91, 95%CI: 0.47–1.78) CCS patients with edoxaban and VKA-based therapy, respectively (P-int = 0.5573).

Conclusions 

In patients with AF who underwent PCI, the edoxaban-based regimen, as compared with VKA-based regimen, provides consistent safety and similar efficacy for ischaemic events in patients with AF regardless of their clinical presentation.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Undergoing Coronary Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Introduction

This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different dual antiplatelet therapies (DAPTs) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs).

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing longer-term (>12 months) DAPT (L-DAPT), 12-month DAPT (DAPT 12Mo), 6-month DAPT (DAPT 6Mo), 3-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy (DAPT 3Mo + ASA), 3-month DAPT followed by a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy (DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12), or 1-month DAPT with a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy (DAPT 1Mo + P2Y12) were searched. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding, any bleeding, definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), and net adverse clinical events (NACE). This Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed with the random-effects model.

Results

Twenty-four RCTs (n = 81339) were included. In comparison with L-DAPT, DAPT 6Mo (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.29–0.83), DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.18–0.82), DAPT 3Mo + ASA (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.17–0.98), and DAPT 1Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.14–0.93) were associated with a lower risk of major bleeding. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.38–0.88) reduced the risk of any bleeding when compared with DAPT 12Mo. L-DAPT decreased the risk of MI and definite or probable stent ST when compared with DAPT 6Mo. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 decreased the risk of NACE in comparison with DAPT 6Mo and DAPT 12Mo. No significant difference in all-cause mortality and cardiac death was observed. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, DAPT 6Mo was comparable to DAPT 12Mo.

Conclusion

Short-term (1–3 months) DAPT is noninferior to DAPT 6Mo after DESs implantation, while L-DAPT reduces MI and definite or probable ST rates. DAPT 3Mo + P2Y12 might be a reasonable trade-off in patients with high risk of bleeding accompanied by ischemia.

The Year in Coagulation: Selected Highlights from 2020

This is the second annual review in the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia to cover highlights in coagulation for cardiac surgery. The goal of this article is to provide readers with a focused summary from the literature of the prior year's most important coagulation topics. In 2020, this included a discussion covering allogeneic transfusion, antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy, factor concentrates, coagulation testing, mechanical circulatory support, and the effects of coronavirus disease 2019.

Risk of Stroke vs. Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Dual vs. Triple Antithrombotic Therapy

BACKGROUND

About 15% of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation might require percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) with stent placement to treat obstructive coronary artery disease. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) and P2Y12 antagonist is recommended after PCI. Patients requiring DAPT also require treatment with oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation. We conducted a meta-analysis to identify the antithrombotic regimen associated with the lowest rate of bleeding and thromboembolic events in non-valvular atrial fibrillation after PCI.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases to identify randomized trials that investigated the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and vitamin K antagonist and/or Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) (triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT)) against single antiplatelet agent and NOAC (dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT)) in the setting of coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring PCI and non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Random-effect models were used to pool data. We used the I² statistic to measure heterogeneity between trials.

RESULTS

We found 4 randomized clinical trials (ENTRUST, AUGUSTUS, PIONEER, REDUAL) using different NOACs. Overall, 9241 patients (median age 70 years, 41.4% female, mean CHADS2VASC Score 3.5) were included. We excluded patients in the very low dose rivaroxaban group from the PIONEER AF-PCI trial and low dose dabigatran group from the REDUAL PCI trial as these are not available in the United States. Our metanalysis showed that dual therapy was associated with less risk of intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31-0.99; p = 0.045; I² = 42%) and major bleeding (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.55-0.79; p < 0.0001; I² = 27%) as compared to triple therapy. Further risk of ischemic stroke (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.63-1.39; p = 0.75; I²=0%), myocardial infarction (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.94-1.47; p = 0.16; I² = 0), or stent thrombosis (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.93-2.41; p = 0.10; I² = 0%) were unchanged. Similar findings were also noted on analysis of NOAC specific DAT vs VKA based TAT.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of an antiplatelet and NOACs (dual therapy) is associated with less risk of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, with no significant difference in ischemic events (stroke myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis).

Double antithrombotic therapy for prevention of bleeding and ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with atrial fibrillation: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of double antithrombotic therapy (DAT) vs. triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) for prevention of bleeding and ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unclear in those subgroups defined by the 5 factors (i.e., sex, age, race, history of diabetes, and type of P2Y12 inhibitor). We aimed to assess the efficacy of DAT vs TAT in these patient subgroups.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and relevant websites to include related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two endpoints of interest were clinically significant bleeding and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Meta-analysis was performed stratified by 5 factors of interest (i.e., sex, age, race, history of diabetes, and type of P2Y12 inhibitor) to obtain pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-regression analysis was conducted to evaluate subgroup effects. We detected publication bias by Egger test and funnel plots.

RESULTS

We included 4 RCTs for meta-analysis. DAT vs TAT significantly reduced the risk of clinically significant bleeding (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.50-0.63). This effect of DAT was observed in most subgroups of interest (HR ranged from 0.54 to 0.69), and was consistent across various subgroups defined by each of the 5 factors of interest (Psubgroup ranged from 0.290 to 0.794). DAT vs TAT led to the similar risk of MACE (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89-1.08). This effect of DAT was observed in all subgroups of interest (all 95% CIs of HRs were across 1.0), and was consistent across various subgroups defined by each of the 5 factors of interest (Psubgroup ranged from 0.308 to 0.828). Publication bias was found only in one subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with TAT, DAT significantly reduces the risk of clinically significant bleeding and leads to the similar risk of MACE in patients with atrial fibrillation following PCI, irrespective of sex, age, race, history of diabetes, and type of P2Y12 inhibitor used at baseline.

Antithrombotic therapy according to baseline bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: applying the PRECISE-DAPT score in RE-DUAL PCI

Aims

Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary intervention are at higher bleeding risk due to the concomitant need for oral anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy. The RE-DUAL PCI trial demonstrated better safety with dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT: dabigatran 110 or 150 mg b.i.d., clopidogrel or ticagrelor) compared to triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT: warfarin, clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and aspirin). We explored the impact of baseline bleeding risk based on the PRECISE-DAPT score for decision-making regarding DAT vs. TAT.

Methods and results

A score ≥25 points qualified high bleeding risk (HBR). Comparisons were made for the primary safety endpoint International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, and the composite efficacy endpoint of death, thrombo-embolic events, or unplanned revascularization, analysed by time-to-event analysis. PRECISE-DAPT was available in 2336/2725 patients, and 37.9% were HBR. Compared to TAT, DAT with dabigatran 110 mg reduced bleeding risk both in non-HBR [hazard ratio (HR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31–0.57] and HBR (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52–0.94), with a greater magnitude of benefit among non-HBR (Pint = 0.02). Dual antithrombotic therapy with dabigatran 150 mg vs. TAT reduced bleeding in non-HBR (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45–0.80), with a trend toward less benefit in HBR patients (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.63–1.34; Pint = 0.08). The risk of ischaemic events was similar on DAT with dabigatran (both 110 and 150 mg) vs. TAT in non-HBR and HBR patients (Pint = 0.45 and Pint = 0.56, respectively).

Conclusions

PRECISE-DAPT score appeared useful to identify AF patients undergoing PCI at further increased risk of bleeding complications and may help clinicians identifying the antithrombotic regimen intensity with the best benefit–risk ratio in an individual patient.

Safety and efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions

Introduction: Antiplatelet therapy represents a key strategy for the prevention of thrombotic complications in patients with both acute and chronic coronary syndromes, particularly those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is associated with a bleeding risk proportionate to its duration. Ever growing appreciation of the prognostic implications associated with bleeding and the development of safer stent platforms over the past years have led to a number of novel antiplatelet treatment strategies being tested among patients undergoing PCI. Areas covered: P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after ashort course DAPT has emerged as ableeding reduction strategy to mitigate such risk while still preventing thrombotic complications. In this review we describe the latest evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing PCI in different clinical settings. Expert opinion: P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after a brief period of DAPT has emerged as an effective approach to reduce the risk of bleeding without any tradeoff in efficacy (i.e., thrombotic complications). This strategy has shown consistent findings in a number of different clinical settings of patients undergoing PCI. Nevertheless, unanswered questions on the ideal patient and the precise P2Y₁₂ monotherapy regimen warrant further investigation.

The High Bleeding Risk Patient with Coronary Artery Disease

Out-of-hospital bleeding is a common complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to the concomitant need for dual antiplatelet therapy. A significant proportion of patients undergoing PCI carry specific clinical characteristics posing them at high bleeding risk (HBR), increasing the risk of hemorrhagic complications secondary to antithrombotic therapy. Identifying patients at HBR and adjust antithrombotic therapy accordingly to optimize treatment benefits and risk is a challenge of modern cardiology. Recently, multiple definitions and tools have been provided to help clinicians with prognostic stratification and treatment decision making in this subgroup.

Benefit of dual antithrombotic therapy with direct oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized clinical trials

Antithrombotic treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is still debated. We conducted a meta-analysis of recent randomized controlled trials to evaluate the benefit of different antithrombotic strategies. Data were analyzed between May and September 2019. Efficacy outcomes were trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); its individual components; stent thrombosis. Safety outcomes were trial-defined primary bleeding outcome; TIMI and ISTH major bleeding; clinically relevant non-major bleeding; intracranial hemorrhage. Differences in outcomes among groups were expressed as pooled odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Four randomized studies were included (10,969 patients). The mean age ranged from 69 to 72 years, prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) varied from 48 to 62%. Comparing dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) with vitamin K antagonist (VKA), OR for trial-defined MACE and primary bleeding outcome were 1.03 (95% CI, 0.86-1.24) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.41-0.86), respectively. There was a 68% lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and a non-statistically significant higher risk of stent thrombosis with DAT. DAT was as effective and safer than TAT in patients with stable coronary artery disease, while a trend towards increased ischemic events was seen in ACS patients. DAT with a DOAC showed similar efficacy and less bleeding than TAT with a VKA. However, increased stent thrombosis with DAT may be present, and TAT should be considered in patients at high ischemic risk, such as ACS patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Double Antithrombotic Therapy With Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background The optimal antithrombotic therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is a topic of debate. We aimed at defining the efficacy and safety of double antithrombotic therapy with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) plus a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) against triple antithrombotic therapy with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) added to a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), illustrating the pooled cumulative distribution of events, the ranking of different NOACs tested in NOAC+SAPT combination strategies, and the state of the current evidence in the field. Methods and Results Randomized controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of trial-defined major adverse cardiac events. The primary safety end point was clinically significant bleeding. Secondary end points were the components of primary end points. Trial-level pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses, reconstructed Kaplan-Meier analyses, and trial sequential analysis were performed. Four randomized controlled trials (10 969 patients) were included. No differences were found in terms of major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.94-1.22), and the NOAC+SAPT strategy showed a lower rate of clinically significant bleeding compared with VKA + DAPT (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.80). These results were consistent in reconstructed Kaplan-Meier analyses. In the Bayesian network meta-analysis, different NOACs displayed diverse risk-benefit profiles. Trial sequential analyses suggest that the evidence for the similarity in major adverse cardiac events compared with VKA + DAPT and the bleeding risk reduction observed with NOAC+SAPT is likely to be conclusive. Conclusions NOAC+SAPT does not increase the risk of major adverse cardiac events and reduces the risk of bleeding compared with VKA + DAPT in AF patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Various NOACs may have different risk-benefit profiles in combination strategies. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42020151089.

Randomised trials and meta-analyses of double vs triple antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation-ACS/PCI: A critical appraisal

•

The optimal antithrombotic regimen to be used in patients with AF and PCI or ACS is still debated.

•

Each of the six randomised controlled trials comparing double to triple therapy has limitations.

•

None was powered to assess differences between treatment arms in ischaemic event rates.

•

The contrasting results regarding ischaemic events within published meta-analyses can be explained by heterogeneity, incompleteness and varying definitions of stent thrombosis.

•

The overall reduced bleeding rates, but increased early definite and probable stent thrombosis rates with double versus triple antithrombotic therapy encourage consideration of triple therapy during the first weeks from PCI followed by double therapy.