抗栓治疗症状性外周动脉疾病:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Antithrombotic Therapy for Symptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Postbus 9101 (Intern 618), 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Department of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Drugs. 2022 Aug;82(12):1287-1302. doi: 10.1007/s40265-022-01756-6. Epub 2022 Aug 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

High-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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

Twenty-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.

CONCLUSION

Clopidogrel, 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.

摘要

背景

在有症状的外周动脉疾病(PAD)中,直接比较单一抗血小板治疗与双联抗血小板治疗或乙酰水杨酸(ASA)加低剂量利伐沙班的高质量证据缺乏。因此,我们对所有在 PAD 中研究的抗血栓形成方案的有效性进行了网络荟萃分析。

方法

系统检索以确定随机对照试验。主要终点是主要心血管不良事件(MACE)和主要出血。次要终点是主要不良肢体事件(MALE)和急性肢体缺血(ALI)。对于每个结局,采用频率主义网络荟萃分析比较药物与 ASA 之间的相对风险(RR)。ASA 是普遍的比较药物,因为大多数研究都将 ASA 作为参考组。

结果

确定了 24 项随机对照试验,共纳入 48759 名患者。在降低 MACE 方面,氯吡格雷(RR 0.78,95%置信区间[CI] 0.66-0.93)、替格瑞洛(RR 0.79,95%CI 0.65-0.97)、ASA 加替格瑞洛(RR 0.79,95%CI 0.64-0.97)和 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班(RR 0.84,95%CI 0.76-0.93)比 ASA 更有效,且相互之间等效。与 ASA 相比,维生素 K 拮抗剂、利伐沙班、ASA 加维生素 K 拮抗剂和 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班更易导致大出血。所有方案在 MALE 方面与 ASA 相似,而 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班在预防 ALI 方面更有效(RR 0.67,95%CI 0.55-0.80)。对接受外周血运重建的患者进行亚组分析显示,干预后≥3 个月时,氯吡格雷、替格瑞洛和 ASA 加替格瑞洛缺乏获益证据,而 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班在预防 MACE(RR 0.87,95%CI 0.78-0.97)和 MALE(RR 0.89,95%CI 0.81-0.97)方面比 ASA 更有效。ASA 加氯吡格雷在血运重建后≥3 个月时并不优于 ASA 在预防 MACE 方面的疗效。在血运重建后 3 个月内缺乏抗血栓治疗策略的证据。

结论

氯吡格雷、替格瑞洛、ASA 加替格瑞洛和 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班在预防 PAD 的 MACE 方面优于 ASA 单药治疗,且相互之间等效。在这四种治疗方法中,只有 ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班会增加大出血的风险。在外周血管介入治疗后 3 个月以上,ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班在预防 MACE 和 MALE 方面优于 ASA,但再次以出血风险增加为代价,而其他治疗方案则显示非优越性。基于目前的证据,氯吡格雷可能被认为是大多数 PAD 患者的抗血栓治疗选择,而在接受外周血管介入治疗的患者中,ASA 加低剂量利伐沙班可能是预防 MACE 和 MALE 的长期(>3 个月)治疗选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/077d/9499921/c9dca8c087c8/40265_2022_1756_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