Zhu Wengen, Guo Linjuan, Liu Fadi, Wan Rong, Shen Yang, Lip Gregory Y H, Hong Kui
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang of Jiangxi, China.
Jiangxi Key Laboratory of Molecular Medicine, Nanchang of Jiangxi, China.
Oncotarget. 2017 Sep 14;8(46):81154-81166. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.20870. eCollection 2017 Oct 6.
The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of triple therapy (TT [an anticoagulant and 2 antiplatelet drugs]) with dual therapy (DAPT [2 antiplatelet drugs] or DT [an anticoagulant and a single antiplatelet drug]) in patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease. We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Embase databases for all relevant studies up to August 2017. The overall risk estimates were calculated using the random-effects model. A total of 17 observational studies were included. Regarding the efficacy outcomes, no differences were observed between the triple therapy and the dual therapy for all-cause death, cardiovascular death, or thrombotic complications (i.e., acute coronary syndrome, stent thrombosis, thromboembolism/stroke, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events). Regarding the safety outcomes, compared with DAPT, TT was associated with increased risks of major bleeding (a relative risk of 1.96 [1.40-2.74]), minor bleeding (1.69 [1.06-2.71]) and overall bleeding (1.80 [1.23-2.64]). Compared wtih DT, TT was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding (1.65 [1.23-2.21]), but rates of minor bleeding (0.99 [0.56-1.77]) and overall bleeding (1.14 [0.76-1.71]) were similar. Overall, TT confers an increased hazard of major bleeding with no thromboembolic protection compared with dual therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease.
心房颤动合并缺血性心脏病患者的最佳抗栓治疗方案仍不明确。因此,我们旨在比较三联疗法(TT [一种抗凝药和两种抗血小板药物])与双联疗法(DAPT [两种抗血小板药物] 或 DT [一种抗凝药和一种抗血小板药物])在心房颤动合并缺血性心脏病患者中的疗效和安全性。我们系统检索了Cochrane图书馆、PubMed和Embase数据库,以获取截至2017年8月的所有相关研究。使用随机效应模型计算总体风险估计值。共纳入17项观察性研究。关于疗效结果,三联疗法与双联疗法在全因死亡、心血管死亡或血栓并发症(即急性冠状动脉综合征、支架血栓形成、血栓栓塞/中风以及主要不良心脑血管事件)方面未观察到差异。关于安全性结果,与DAPT相比,TT与大出血风险增加(相对风险为1.96 [1.40 - 2.74])、小出血风险增加(1.69 [1.06 - 2.71])和总体出血风险增加(1.80 [1.23 - 2.64])相关。与DT相比,TT与大出血风险增加(1.65 [1.23 - 2.21])相关,但小出血(0.99 [0.56 - 1.77])和总体出血(1.14 [0.76 - 1.71])发生率相似。总体而言,与双联疗法相比,在心房颤动合并缺血性心脏病患者中,TT增加了大出血风险,且没有血栓栓塞保护作用。