Kaluski, Edo

Abstract Aims To compare early de-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (1–3 months) to monotherapy with either P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin vs. 12 months DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Methods and results Electronic databases of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched through February 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted with random effects model. The main endpoints of interest were cardiovascular mortality and total bleeding events. Among seven trials (35 821 patients), 52.6% patients were presented with acute coronary syndrome. A total of 3359 patients and 14 530 patients were de-escalated to aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, respectively. At a median follow-up of 12 months, compared with 12 months of DAPT, there was no significant difference in cardiovascular mortality between 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.84 (95% credible interval 0.29–2.43)], 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy [HR 0.74 (0.39–1.46)], or 3 months of DAPT [HR 1.00 (0.54–1.86)] followed by aspirin monotherapy. Except for de-escalation of DAPT to aspirin monotherapy after 3 months [HR 0.75 (0.43–1.20)], de-escalation to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 1 month [HR 0.28 (0.10–0.83)], or 3 months [HR 0.57 (0.33–0.98)] were associated with significant decrease in total bleeding events. There were no significant differences in terms of ischaemic endpoints among different DAPT strategies. Conclusion Early de-escalation of DAPT (1–3 months) to monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor instead of aspirin might be a safer and equally effective approach compared with 12 months of DAPT in patients with PCI and DES.

Background The safety and efficacy of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes mellitus remains controversial. Design A meta-analysis to investigate the effects of aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus. Methods Ten randomized controlled trials were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases until 27 September 2018. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and risk differences (RDs) reported as incident events per 1000 person-years were calculated. Results In 33,679 patients, aspirin did not significantly reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87–1.00, P = 0.06; RD −0.68 incident cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI −1.54, 0.17)), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83–1.09, P = 0.49; RD 0.11 incident cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI −0.80, 1.02)), myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75–1.11, P = 0.36; RD −0.66 incident cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI −2.07, 0.75)), or stroke (RR 0.91, 95% C, 0.76–1.10, P = 0.33; RD −0.55 incident cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI −1.57, 0.47)). There was a significantly higher risk of total bleeding associated with aspirin (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.07–1.55, P = 0.01; RD 1.49 incident cases per 1000 person-years (95% CI 0.36, 2.61)). Conclusion The use of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes mellitus increases the risk of total bleeding without reducing the risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes.

Background The comparative effects of statins, ezetimibe with or without statins and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors remain unassessed. Design Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare treatment groups. Methods Thirty-nine randomized controlled trials were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (inception – September 2017). Results In network meta-analysis of 189,116 patients, PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the best treatment for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events (Surface Under Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA), 85%), myocardial infarction (SUCRA, 84%) and stroke (SUCRA, 80%). PCSK9 inhibitors reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with ezetimibe + statin (odds ratio (OR): 0.72; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.55–0.95; Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria: moderate), statin (OR: 0.78; 95% CrI: 0.62–0.97; GRADE: moderate) and placebo (OR: 0.63; 95% CrI: 0.49–0.79; GRADE: high). The PCSK9 inhibitors were consistently superior to groups for major adverse cardiovascular event reduction in secondary prevention trials (SUCRA, 95%). Statins had the highest probability of having lowest rates of all-cause mortality (SUCRA, 82%) and cardiovascular mortality (SUCRA, 84%). Compared with placebo, statins reduced the risk of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88; 95% CrI: 0.83–0.94; GRADE: moderate) and cardiovascular mortality (OR: 0.84; 95% CrI: 0.77–0.90; GRADE: high). For cardiovascular mortality, PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the second best treatment (SUCRA, 78%) followed by ezetimibe + statin (SUCRA, 50%). Conclusion PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the most effective treatment for reducing major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction and stroke, without having major safety concerns. Statins were ranked as the most effective therapy for reducing mortality.