Antithrombotic strategies after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. (1st September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ke, Yijun; Wang, Juan; Wang, Wei; Guo, Sitong; Dai, Mengfei; Wu, Lifang; Bao, Yanni; Li, Baozhu; Ju, Jing; Xu, Hang; Jin, Yong
• Is Part Of: International journal of cardiology. Volume 362(2022)
• Page Start: 139
• Page End: 146
• Publication Date: 2022-09-01
• Subjects: Antithrombotic -- Transcatheter aortic valve implantation -- Network meta-analysis -- Randomized controlled trials; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.05.060
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-5273

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: Meta-analyses comparing different antithrombotic strategies were conducted to determine the optimal therapeutic regimen post transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, there were restricted high-quality direct comparisons across the different antithrombotic therapeutic regimens. We sought to explore the safety and efficacy of different antithrombotic therapy strategies after TAVI using network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase and Medline through August 2021 for RCTs that directly compared different antithrombotic schemes in adults who had undergone TAVI. We conducted a pairwise and network meta-analysis measuring all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, all bleeding and life-threatening or major bleeding events. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve was estimated to rank the therapies. We evaluated the risk of bias and graded the quality of the evidence using established methods. Results: Six RCTs of 2824 patients who underwent TAVI were analysed. The risk of all bleeding [relative risk (RR) 1.88 (1.34–2.64)] and life-threatening or major bleeding [RR 2.03 (1.27–3.24)] was significantly higher for dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) than single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), whereas there was no significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality [RR 1.01 (0.61–1.68)] between DAPT and SAPT. Oral anticoagulant (OAC) + SAPT (OACSAPT) had significantly higher rates of all bleeding and life-threatening or major bleeding events compared with SAPT ([RR 3.46 (2.23–5.36)], [RR 2.86 (1.50–5.45)]). The risk of all-cause mortality [RR 1.72 (1.14–2.59)] and all bleeding [RR 1.84 (1.38–2.44)] were significantly higher for OACSAPT than DAPT, whereas there was no significant difference in the risk of life-threatening or major bleeding events [RR 1.41 (0.89–2.23)] between DAPT and OACSAPT. There was no significant difference in stroke or myocardial infarction among the different antithrombotic strategies (SAPT, DAPT and OACSAPT). Additionally, patients receiving OACSAPT had the highest risks for all-cause mortality (SUCRA 3.5%) and life-threatening or major bleeding (SUCRA 2.3%). SAPT seemed to be superior to DAPT in terms of all-cause mortality (SUCRA SAPT: 76.7%, DAPT: 69.8%) and stroke (SUCRA 69.6%, 59.7%). Conclusions: Except for OACSAPT having a higher all-cause mortality than DAPT, patients who underwent TAVI had similar all-cause mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction rates among different antithrombotic regimens. Patients on SAPT had a significantly lower bleeding risk than those on DAPT and OACSAPT. Our study indicates that SAPT is the preferred therapeutic strategy when there is no indication for OAC or DAPT. Furthermore, the application of OACSAPT was ranked the worst among all antithrombotic regimens and should be averted due to an increased risk of all-cause mortality and all bleeding. Highlights: This is the first network meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of different antithrombotic strategies. The literature included in this study included recently published studies. Our study indicates that SAPT is the preferred therapeutic strategy when there is no indication for OAC or DAPT.