Testa Luca, Zoccai Giuseppe Biondi, Porto Italo, Trotta Graziana, Agostoni Pierfrancesco, Andreotti Felicita, Crea Filippo
Institute of Cardiology, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom, and Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Italy.
Am J Cardiol. 2007 Jun 15;99(12):1637-42. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.01.052. Epub 2007 Apr 27.
After acute coronary syndromes, the beneficial effect of aspirin plus clopidogrel (A+C) or aspirin plus dose-adjusted warfarin (A+W) compared with aspirin alone is well established. However, these regimens were never compared. To compare the risk-benefit profile of A+C versus A+W after acute coronary syndromes, major medical databases for randomized controlled trials comparing 1 of these combined approaches versus aspirin alone after an acute coronary syndrome (updated June 2006) were searched. Evaluated end points were major adverse events [MAEs: all-cause death, acute myocardial infarction [AMI], thromboembolic stroke, major bleeds, and overall risk of stroke [hemorrhagic or ischemic]). Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for (1) A+W versus aspirin alone, (2) A+C versus aspirin alone, and (3) A+W versus A+C using adjusted indirect meta-analysis. Thirteen studies were included, totaling 69,741 patients. Ten compared A+W versus aspirin alone and 3 compared A+C versus aspirin alone. Each combined approach yielded a significantly lower risk of MAEs, albeit an increased risk of major bleeds, compared with aspirin alone. No significant difference was found for A+W versus A+C for risk of overall MAEs, death, or AMI. However, A+W versus A+C was associated with a significantly lower risk of thromboembolic stroke (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88, number needed to treat 60) and all types of stroke (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.94, p=0.038), but also with increased risk of major bleeds (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.8, number needed to harm 300). In conclusion, after an acute coronary syndrome, A+W and A+C are comparable in the prevention of MAEs, death, and AMI compared with aspirin alone. Allocating 100 patients to A+W (at international normalized ratio 2 to 3) with respect to A+C could prevent 17 thromboembolic strokes while causing 3 major bleeds.
急性冠状动脉综合征后,与单用阿司匹林相比,阿司匹林加氯吡格雷(A+C)或阿司匹林加剂量调整的华法林(A+W)的有益效果已得到充分证实。然而,这些治疗方案从未进行过比较。为了比较急性冠状动脉综合征后A+C与A+W的风险效益情况,检索了主要医学数据库中关于急性冠状动脉综合征后比较这些联合治疗方法之一与单用阿司匹林的随机对照试验(2006年6月更新)。评估的终点是主要不良事件[MAEs:全因死亡、急性心肌梗死(AMI)、血栓栓塞性中风、大出血以及总体中风风险(出血性或缺血性)]。使用校正间接荟萃分析计算(1)A+W与单用阿司匹林、(2)A+C与单用阿司匹林以及(3)A+W与A+C的比值比(OR)及95%置信区间(CI)。纳入13项研究,共69741例患者。10项研究比较A+W与单用阿司匹林,3项研究比较A+C与单用阿司匹林。与单用阿司匹林相比,每种联合治疗方法均使MAEs风险显著降低,尽管大出血风险增加。在总体MAEs、死亡或AMI风险方面,未发现A+W与A+C有显著差异。然而,A+W与A+C相比,血栓栓塞性中风风险显著降低(OR 0.53,95%CI 0.31至0.88,需治疗人数60)以及所有类型中风风险显著降低(OR 0.58,95%CI 0.35至0.94,p=0.038),但大出血风险也增加(OR 1.9,95%CI 1.2至2.8,需伤害人数300)。总之,急性冠状动脉综合征后,与单用阿司匹林相比,A+W和A+C在预防MAEs、死亡和AMI方面相当。相对于A+C,将100例患者分配至A+W(国际标准化比值为2至3)可预防17例血栓栓塞性中风,同时导致3例大出血。