NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.
Structured Abstract
Objectives:
For patients with unstable angina or non–ST elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI), antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications are prescribed to reduce and prevent ischemic events and mortality. There is uncertainty about the optimal dosing and timing of these medications to balance ischemic risk and bleeding risk across different treatment strategies (early invasive, initial conservative, and postdischarge).
Data sources:
We searched PubMed®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant English-language comparative studies.
Review methods:
Two investigators screened each abstract and full-text article for inclusion, abstracted data, rated quality and applicability, and graded evidence. When possible, random-effects meta-analysis was used to compute summary estimates of effects.
Results:
Our review included 175 studies (302 articles); 87 studies were relevant to early invasive management, 33 were relevant to initial conservative management, and 71 were relevant to the postdischarge setting.
Patients undergoing an early invasive approach. Upstream (precatheterization) treatment using glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) was associated with lower rates of revascularization (odds ratio [OR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.92) but higher risk of major bleeding events (OR 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.43) at 30 days compared with deferred (periprocedural) GPI treatment (high strength of evidence [SOE]). This higher risk of bleeding from upstream GPI administration also occurred with either pretreatment (OR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.01; moderate SOE) or deferred clopidogrel administration (OR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.50; high SOE). Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel reduced rates of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days (5.7% prasugrel vs. 7.4% clopidogrel; moderate SOE). After 1 year, in a subgroup of patients who all had UA/NSTEMI, prasugrel reduced rates of the same composite endpoint compared with clopidogrel (9.9% prasugrel vs. 12.1% clopidogrel), as did ticagrelor (10.6% ticagrelor vs. 12.6% clopidogrel) (moderate SOE). Bivalirudin reduced major bleeding events at 30 days compared with heparin in several clinical scenarios: with planned GPI use (OR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.63); without planned GPI use (OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.85; both high SOE); and in patients treated with clopidogrel before undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.85; moderate SOE). Bivalirudin also reduced minor bleeding events at 30 days compared with heparin plus GPI (OR 0.49; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.59; high SOE).
Patients undergoing an initial conservative approach. In randomized trials, enoxaparin reduced composite ischemic events (OR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; high SOE) and myocardial infarction (OR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.95; moderate SOE) at around 30 days compared with unfractionated heparin. The addition of GPIs to unfractionated heparin reduced the rate of mortality up to 30 days (OR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.96), but minor bleeding rates were increased (OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.19; both high SOE).
Postdischarge treatment. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduced the rates of composite ischemic outcomes (ORs/relative risks ranging from 0.69 to 0.80; in-hospital, 9 months, and 1 year) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (DAPT 2.3% to 5.8% vs. aspirin 3.0% to 8.5%; 9 months and 1 year) compared with single antiplatelet therapy (high SOE). Meta-analyses using adjusted or propensity-scored hazard ratios from observational studies showed an association between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use (any type with dual antiplatelet use) and increased rates of composite ischemic endpoints, death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. (Most outcomes were measured around 1 year and rated low SOE, and ratings were downgraded since the findings conflicted with the few randomized trials of omeprazole.) However PPIs with DAPT use reduced rates of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (moderate SOE).
Limitations:
This review was limited to comparative studies of antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments, many of which did not separate findings by treatment approach (invasive, conservative, postdischarge) and included a mix of UA/NSTEMI and acute coronary syndrome populations. Also, different definitions of composite endpoints made quantitative analysis less feasible. Few trials of percutaneous coronary intervention reported long-term outcomes, and very few studies reported findings in the subpopulations of interest.
Conclusions:
The number of studies available for each comparison was relatively small, and the preponderance of observational studies made the findings for some comparisons inconclusive. Further study is needed to determine the effectiveness and safety of newer agents in combination with other antiplatelet and anticoagulant strategies. Uncertainty remains about the optimal dosing, timing, duration, and combinations of these options, especially in subpopulations of interest (e.g., the elderly, patients with diabetes, women, obese patients, and people with comorbid illness).
Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Key Informants
- Technical Expert Panel
- Peer Reviewers
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- References
- Abbreviations
- Appendix A Exact Search Strings
- Appendix B Data Abstraction Elements
- Appendix C List of Included Studies
- Appendix D List of Excluded Studies
- Appendix E Quality and Applicability of Included Studies
- Appendix F Study Characteristics Tables
- Appendix G Results Tables
- Appendix H Subgroup Tables
- Appendix I Sensitivity Analyses
- Appendix J Unadjusted, Adjusted, and Propensity-Scored Results for Studies of Proton Pump Inhibitors
Updated January 2014
Addendum: This report has been updated to include an additional article identified in the literature related to dual antiplatelet versus triple therapy, with revisions to the key points, results, strength of evidence tables, and appendixes.
Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services1, Contract No. 290-2007-10066-I Prepared by: Duke Evidence-based Practice Center, Durham, NC
Suggested citation:
Melloni CM, Jones WS, Washam JB, Hasselblad V, Mayer SB, Halim S, Subherwal S, Alexander K, Kong DF, Heidenfelder BL, Irvine RJ, Wing L, Dolor RJ. Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Treatments for Unstable Angina/Non–ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 129. (Prepared by the Duke Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10066-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 13(14)-EHC125-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; November 2013. Updated January 2014. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.
This report is based on research conducted by the Duke Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2007-10066-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.
This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.
None of the investigators has any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.
- 1
540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www
.ahrq.gov
- Review Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery Disease[ 2012]Review Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery DiseaseDolor RJ, Melloni C, Chatterjee R, Allen LaPointe NM, Williams JB Jr, Coeytaux RR, McBroom AJ, Musty MD, Wing L, Samsa GP, et al. 2012 Aug
- Review Treatment Strategies for Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease[ 2013]Review Treatment Strategies for Patients With Peripheral Artery DiseaseJones WS, Schmit KM, Vemulapalli S, Subherwal S, Patel MR, Hasselblad V, Heidenfelder BL, Chobot MM, Posey R, Wing L, et al. 2013 May
- Bleeding risk in patients prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy after coronary interventions: the ADAPTT retrospective population-based cohort studies.[Health Technol Assess. 2023]Bleeding risk in patients prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy and triple therapy after coronary interventions: the ADAPTT retrospective population-based cohort studies.Harris J, Pouwels KB, Johnson T, Sterne J, Pithara C, Mahadevan K, Reeves B, Benedetto U, Loke Y, Lasserson D, et al. Health Technol Assess. 2023 May; 27(8):1-257.
- Review Prasugrel (Efient®) with percutaneous coronary intervention for treating acute coronary syndromes (review of TA182): systematic review and economic analysis.[Health Technol Assess. 2015]Review Prasugrel (Efient®) with percutaneous coronary intervention for treating acute coronary syndromes (review of TA182): systematic review and economic analysis.Greenhalgh J, Bagust A, Boland A, Dwan K, Beale S, Fleeman N, McEntee J, Dundar Y, Richardson M, Fisher M. Health Technol Assess. 2015 Apr; 19(29):1-130.
- Bivalirudin versus heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: pooled analysis from the ACUITY and ISAR-REACT 4 trials.[Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012]Bivalirudin versus heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: pooled analysis from the ACUITY and ISAR-REACT 4 trials.Ndrepepa G, Neumann FJ, Deliargyris EN, Mehran R, Mehilli J, Ferenc M, Schulz S, Schömig A, Kastrati A, Stone GW. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Oct; 5(5):705-12. Epub 2012 Oct 9.
- Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Treatments for Unstable Angina/Non–ST Elevation M...Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Treatments for Unstable Angina/Non–ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Your browsing activity is empty.
Activity recording is turned off.
See more...