scholarly journals Balancing Benefits and Risks of Long-Term Antiplatelet Therapy in Noncardioembolic Transient Ischemic Attack or Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina A. Hilkens ◽  
Ale Algra ◽  
Hans Christoph Diener ◽  
Philip M. Bath ◽  
László Csiba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Net Benefit ◽  
Antiplatelet Treatment ◽  
Ischemic Attack ◽  
Ischemic Events

Background and Purpose: Lifelong treatment with antiplatelet drugs is recommended following a transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. Bleeding complications may offset the benefit of antiplatelet drugs in patients at increased risk of bleeding and low risk of recurrent ischemic events. We aimed to investigate the net benefit of antiplatelet treatment according to an individuals’ bleeding risk. Methods: We pooled individual patient data from 6 randomized clinical trials (CAPRIE [Clopidogrel Versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events], ESPS-2 [European Stroke Prevention Study-2], MATCH [Management of Atherothrombosis With Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients], CHARISMA [Clopidogrel for High Atherothrombotic Risk and Ischemic Stabilization, Management, and Avoidance], ESPRIT [European/Australasian Stroke Prevention in Reversible Ischemia Trial], and PRoFESS [Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes]) investigating antiplatelet therapy in the subacute or chronic phase after noncardioembolic transient ischemic attack or stroke. Patients were stratified into quintiles according to their predicted risk of major bleeding with the S 2 TOP-BLEED score. The annual risk of major bleeding and recurrent ischemic events was assessed per quintile for 4 scenarios: (1) aspirin monotherapy, (2) aspirin-clopidogrel versus aspirin or clopidogrel monotherapy, (3) aspirin-dipyridamole versus clopidogrel, and (4) aspirin versus clopidogrel. Net benefit was calculated for the second, third, and fourth scenario. Results: Thirty seven thousand eighty-seven patients were included in the analyses. Both risk of major bleeding and recurrent ischemic events increased over quintiles of predicted bleeding risk, but risk of ischemic events was consistently higher (eg, from 0.7%/y (bottom quintile) to 3.2%/y (top quintile) for major bleeding on aspirin and from 2.5%/y to 10.2%/y for risk of ischemic events on aspirin). Treatment with aspirin-clopidogrel led to more major bleedings (0.9%–1.7% per year), than reduction in ischemic events (ranging from 0.4% to 0.9/1.0% per year) across all quintiles. There was no clear preference for either aspirin-dipyridamole or clopidogrel according to baseline bleeding risk. Conclusions: Among patients with a transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke included in clinical trials of antiplatelet therapy, the risk of recurrent ischemic events and of major bleeding increase in parallel. Antiplatelet treatment cannot be individualized solely based on bleeding risk assessment.

scholarly journals RETRACTED ARTICLE: Dual versus mono antiplatelet therapy for acute non- cardio embolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, an efficacy and safety analysis - updated meta-analysis

BMC Neurology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christessa Emille Que Albay ◽  
Frederick Gavril D. Leyson ◽  
Federick C. Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Dual Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Stroke Recurrence ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Cardiovascular Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Abstract Background New evidence on the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention have been realized in the recent years. An updated meta analysis was done to determine the effect of the various dual antiplatelets vs aspirin alone on recurrence rate of ischemic stroke, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and its safety profile as reported through major bleeding. Methods PubMed, Cochrane and Science Direct data bases were utilized, RCTs evaluating dual antiplatelet vs mono antiplatelet therapy for acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack within < 72 h from ictus were searched up to July 2019. Risk ratio at 95% confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate stroke recurrence, cardiac events and mortality, and major bleeding. Results Sixteen randomized controlled trials with a population of 28, 032 patients were pooled into a meta-analysis. Dual antiplatelet therapy was significantly superior over mono antiplatelet therapy in the reduction of stroke (RR 0.75, 95% CI:0.68–0.83, p value< 0.00001) and composite events namely cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (0.73 95% CI: 0.65–0.82, p value < 0.00001), while bleeding events were noted to be not significant (1.22 95% CI: 0.87–1.70, p value = 0.25). Conclusion In acute non-cardioembolic ischemic strokes or those who have suffered a transient ischemic attack, dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with efficacy in stroke recurrence and composite cardiac events, with a non-significant risk of major bleeding.

scholarly journals Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Versus Aspirin in Patients With Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirtipal Bhatia ◽  
Vardhmaan Jain ◽  
Devika Aggarwal ◽  
Muthiah Vaduganathan ◽  
Sameer Arora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Dual Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Recurrent Stroke ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Background and Purpose: Antiplatelet therapy is key for preventing thrombotic events after transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke. Although the role of aspirin is well established, there is emerging evidence for the role of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in preventing recurrent stroke. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and study-level meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of early initiation of short-term DAPT (aspirin+P2Y12 inhibitor for up to 3 months) versus aspirin alone in patients with acute stroke or transient ischemic attack. Primary efficacy outcome was risk of recurrent stroke and primary safety outcome was incidence of major bleeding. Secondary outcomes studied were risk of any ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause death. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and CIs were calculated using a random-effects model. Results: Four trials with a total of 21 459 patients were included. As compared to aspirin alone, DAPT had a lower risk of recurrent stroke (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.68–0.83]; P <0.001; I 2 = 0%) but a higher risk of major bleeding events (RR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.14–4.34], P =0.02, I 2 = 46.5%). Patients receiving DAPT had a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69–0.84], P <0.001, I 2 = 0%) and recurrent ischemic events (RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.67–0.82], P <0.001, I 2 = 0%). Conclusions: As compared to aspirin alone, short-term DAPT within 24 hours of high-risk transient ischemic attack or mild-moderate ischemic stroke reduces the risk of recurrent stroke at the expense of higher risk of major bleeding.

Clinical Effects of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy or Aspirin Monotherapy after Acute Minor Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack, a Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Condello ◽  
Gaetano Liccardo ◽  
Giuseppe Ferrante
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Hemorrhagic Stroke ◽  
Dual Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Stroke Recurrence ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Minor Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Background: Evidence about the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors in patients with acute minor ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) is emerging. The aim of our study was to provide an updated and comprehensive analysis about the risks and benefits of DAPT versus aspirin monotherapy in this setting. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov databases, main international conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing DAPT versus aspirin monotherapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke or TIA not eligible for thrombolysis or thrombectomy presenting in the first 24 hours after the acute event. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary efficacy endpoint was ischemic stroke recurrence, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Secondary endpoints were intracranial hemorrhage, hemorrhagic stroke, and all-cause death. Results: A total of 4 studies enrolling 21,459 patients were included. DAPT with clopidogrel was used in 3 studies, DAPT with ticagrelor in one study. DAPT duration was 21 days in one study, 1 month in one study, and 3 months in the remaining studies. DAPT was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of ischemic stroke recurrence (relative risk [RR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.82, P<0.001, number needed to treat 50 [95% CI 40-72], while it was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding (RR, 2.59; 95% CI 1.49-4.53, P=0.001, number needed to harm 330 [95% CI 149-1111]), of intracranial hemorrhage (RR 3.06, 95% CI 1.41-6.66, P=0.005), with a trend towards higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.83-4.05, P=0.14), and a slight tendency towards higher risk of all-cause death (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.89-1.89, P=0.16). Conclusions: Among patients with acute minor ischemic stroke or TIA, DAPT, as compared with aspirin monotherapy, might offer better effectiveness in terms of ischemic stroke recurrence at the expense of a higher risk of major bleeding. The trade-off between ischemic benefits and bleeding risks should be assessed in tailoring the therapeutic strategies.

scholarly journals Antithrombotic Treatment in Cryptogenic Stroke Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale

Stroke ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (11) ◽  
pp. 3135-3140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Sagris ◽  
Georgios Georgiopoulos ◽  
Kalliopi Perlepe ◽  
Konstantinos Pateras ◽  
Eleni Korompoki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Patent Foramen Ovale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Stroke Recurrence ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Foramen Ovale ◽  
Antiplatelet Treatment ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Ischemic Attack

Background and Purpose— It is unclear whether treatment with anticoagulants or antiplatelets is the optimal strategy in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack of undetermined cause and patent foramen ovale that is not percutaneously closed. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare anticoagulant or antiplatelet treatment in this population. Methods— We searched PubMed until July 16, 2019 for trials comparing anticoagulants and antiplatelet treatment in patients with stroke/transient ischemic attack and medically treated patent foramen ovale using the terms: “cryptogenic or embolic stroke of undetermined source” and “stroke or cerebrovascular accident or transient ischemic attack” and “patent foramen ovale or patent foramen ovale or paradoxical embolism” and “trial or study” and “antithrombotic or anticoagulant or antiplatelet.” The outcomes assessed were stroke recurrence, major bleeding, and the composite end point of stroke recurrence or major bleeding. We used 3 random-effects models: (1) a reference model based on the inverse variance method with the Sidik and Jonkman heterogeneity estimator; (2) a strict model, implementing the Hartung and Knapp method; and (3) a commonly used Bayesian model with a prior that assumes moderate to large between-study variance. Results— Among 112 articles identified in the literature search, 5 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis (1720 patients, mean follow-up 2.3±0.5 years). Stroke recurrence occurred at a rate of 1.73 per 100 patient-years in anticoagulant-assigned patients and 2.39 in antiplatelet-assigned patients (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.32–1.48 for the Sidik and Jonkman estimator). Major bleeding occurred at a rate of 1.16 per 100 patient-years in anticoagulant-assigned patients and 0.68 in antiplatelet-assigned patients (hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.72–3.59 for the Sidik and Jonkman estimator). The composite outcome occurred in 52 anticoagulant-assigned and 54 antiplatelet-assigned patients (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.65–1.70 for the Sidik and Jonkman estimator). Conclusions— We cannot exclude a large reduction of stroke recurrence in anticoagulant-assigned patients compared with antiplatelet-assigned, without significant differences in major bleeding. An adequately powered randomized controlled trial of a non–vitamin K antagonist versus aspirin is warranted.

scholarly journals High ABCD2 Scores and In-Hospital Interventions following Transient Ischemic Attack

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 76-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawna Cutting ◽  
Elizabeth Regan ◽  
Vivien H. Lee ◽  
Shyam Prabhakaran
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Heart Association ◽  
Reperfusion Therapy ◽  
Large Artery ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Abcd2 Score ◽  
Ischemic Attack ◽  
Ischemic Events

Background and Purpose: Following transient ischemic attack (TIA), there is increased risk for ischemic stroke. The American Heart Association recommends admission of patients with ABCD2 scores ≥3 for observation, rapid performance of diagnostic tests, and potential acute intervention. We aimed to determine if there is a relationship between ABCD2 scores, in-hospital ischemic events, and in-hospital treatments after TIA admission. Methods: We reviewed consecutive patients admitted between 2006 and 2011 following a TIA, defined as transient focal neurological symptoms attributed to a specific vascular distribution and lasting <24 h. Three interventions were prespecified: anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, carotid or intracranial revascularization, and intravenous or intra-arterial reperfusion therapies. We compared rates of in-hospital recurrent TIA or ischemic stroke and the receipt of interventions among patients with low (<3) versus high (≥3) ABCD2 scores. Results: Of 249 patients, 11 patients (4.4%) had recurrent TIAs or strokes during their stay (8 TIAs, 3 strokes). All 11 had ABCD2 scores ≥3, and no neurological events occurred in patients with lower scores (5.1 vs. 0%; p = 0.37). Twelve patients (4.8%) underwent revascularization for large artery stenosis, 16 (6.4%) were started on anticoagulants, and no patient received intravenous or intra-arterial reperfusion therapy. The ABCD2 score was not associated with anticoagulation (p = 0.59) or revascularization (p = 0.20). Conclusions: Higher ABCD2 scores may predict early ischemic events after TIA but do not predict the need for intervention. Outpatient evaluation for those with scores <3 would potentially have delayed revascularization or anticoagulant treatment in nearly one-fifth of ‘low-risk' patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document