Dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention-meta-analysis and meta-regression

Abstract

Background: Anti-thrombotic regimen in patients on long term anticoagulation requiring coronary intervention remains a clinical challenge.

Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of triple therapy (dual antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulant) with dual therapy (P2Y12 inhibitor and anticoagulant) in patients on long-term anticoagulants after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Major bleeding was the primary outcome.

Results: Three observational studies and 3 randomized controlled trials with a total of 6654 patients met our selection criteria. At a mean follow up of 12.5 months major bleeding was lower in dual therapy cohort compared to triple therapy (2.2% vs 5.2%, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.81, P = 0.001). No difference was observed between the two groups for major adverse cardiac events (11.8% vs 13.0%, RR 1.03, CI 0.79-1.34, P = 0.85), all-cause mortality (3.9% vs 5.6%, RR 0.94, CI 0.65-1.36, P = 0.76), myocardial infarction (3.7% vs 3.9%, RR 1.12, CI 0.83-1.50, P = 0.47), target vessel revascularization (6.8% vs 7.1%, RR 1.12, CI 0.72-1.74, P = 0.60), thromboembolic events (1.3% vs 1.6%, RR 0.95, CI 0.55-1.64, P = 0.85) and stent thrombosis (1.3% vs 1.4%, RR1.36, CI 0.84-2.21, P = 0.21).

Conclusion: For patients undergoing PCI and requiring long term anticoagulation, a strategy of P2Y12 inhibitor plus anticoagulant confers a benefit of less major bleeding with no difference in major adverse cardiac events, mortality, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis or thromboembolism compared with triple therapy.

Keywords: Anticoagulation; Dual therapy; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Triple therapy.