Suppr超能文献

阿司匹林单药治疗与氯吡格雷单药治疗稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者的疗效比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Aspirin Versus Clopidogrel Monotherapy for the Treatment of Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi, China.

Department of Cardiology, Jingzhou Central Hospital, The Second Clinical Medical College, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, Hubei, China.

出版信息

Adv Ther. 2019 Aug;36(8):2062-2071. doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-01004-6. Epub 2019 Jun 1.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Although aspirin (ASA) is the mainstay of treatment for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke, the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events (CAPRIE) trial showed ASA monotherapy to be inferior to clopidogrel in preventing recurrent adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high cardiac risks. Here, we aimed to systematically compare ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched and studies were included if they compared ASA versus clopidogrel monotherapy for the treatment of patients with CAD and they reported adverse clinical outcomes. The latest version of RevMan software (version 5.3) was used as the statistical tool for the data analysis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated to interpret the data.

RESULTS

A total number of 5497 patients (from years 2003 to 2011) were treated with ASA monotherapy, whereas 2544 patients were treated with clopidogrel monotherapy. Results of this analysis showed no significant difference in composite endpoints (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47-2.10; P = 0.98), all-cause mortality (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.82-1.33; P = 0.71), cardiac death (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.17-4.74; P = 0.89, myocardial infarction (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52-1.36; P = 0.48), stroke (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.39-4.06; P = 0.70), and bleeding defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC [grade 3 or above]) (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78-2.12; P = 0.33).

CONCLUSION

This analysis did not show any significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and BARC grade 3 or above among CAD patients who were treated with either ASA or clopidogrel monotherapy. However, as a result of the limited data, this hypothesis should be confirmed in other major trials.

摘要

简介

尽管阿司匹林(ASA)是预防复发性缺血性中风的主要治疗药物,但氯吡格雷与缺血事件风险患者的阿司匹林(CAPRIE)试验表明,ASA 单药治疗在预防高心脏风险患者的复发性不良心血管结局方面不如氯吡格雷。在这里,我们旨在系统比较 ASA 与氯吡格雷单药治疗稳定型冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者。

方法

电子数据库进行了搜索,如果研究比较了 ASA 与氯吡格雷单药治疗 CAD 患者,并报告了不良临床结局,则将其纳入研究。最新版本的 RevMan 软件(版本 5.3)被用作数据分析的统计工具。计算比值比(OR)和 95%置信区间(CI)以解释数据。

结果

共有 5497 例患者(2003 年至 2011 年)接受 ASA 单药治疗,2544 例患者接受氯吡格雷单药治疗。该分析结果显示,复合终点(心血管死亡、心肌梗死和中风)(OR 0.99,95%CI 0.47-2.10;P=0.98)、全因死亡率(OR 1.05,95%CI 0.82-1.33;P=0.71)、心脏死亡(OR 0.89,95%CI 0.17-4.74;P=0.89)、心肌梗死(OR 0.84,95%CI 0.52-1.36;P=0.48)、中风(OR 1.26,95%CI 0.39-4.06;P=0.70)和出血定义为学术研究联合委员会(BARC [3 级或以上])(OR 1.28,95%CI 0.78-2.12;P=0.33)之间无显著差异。

结论

该分析并未显示接受 ASA 或氯吡格雷单药治疗的 CAD 患者在全因死亡率、心脏死亡、心肌梗死、中风和 BARC 3 级或以上方面有任何显著差异。然而,由于数据有限,这一假设应在其他主要试验中得到证实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6ab5/6822863/a4f064b0a5b7/12325_2019_1004_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验