Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Regimen With or Without Anticoagulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Indirect Comparison and Meta-analysis

Evaluating Effectiveness and Safety in Chronic Kidney Disease with Atrial Flutter Using an Anticoagulation Strategy

Background and objectives: Recent randomized trials of oral antithrombotic drugs with atrial flutter (AFL) excluded patients with renal impairment because of their increased risk of bleeding. To date, no relevant studies have assessed the effectiveness and safety of different antithrombotic drugs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients with AFL. This cohort study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of different antithrombotic drugs in CKD patients with AFL. This study also investigated the risk of cardiovascular events from antithrombotic drugs through different risk profiles of stroke stratified by the CHA₂DS₂-VASc score. Materials and Methods: This cohort study was performed in patients with AFL and CKD who were extracted from the National Health Insurance (NHI) Database in Taiwan. Oral antithrombotic therapy (oral anticoagulants (OAC) or antiplatelets (APT)) was administered to patients who had been diagnosed with AFL after being diagnosed with CKD between 2011 and 2015. Primary outcomes, including ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, and composite of stroke, and secondary outcomes, including major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), major bleeding, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular-related death, were examined. Results: A total of 2468 patients were included in this study. The results showed no statistically significant differences in the risk of primary outcomes. For the secondary outcomes, there were also no statistically significant differences in the risk of MACEs and major bleeding. However, the pooled results indicated that the hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality with OAC was 0.24 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.10–0.55) compared with combination therapy, and the HR for APT compared with OAC was 2.86 (95% CI = 1.48–5.53). Conclusions: In the studied population, OAC or APT alone were proved equally effective for stroke prophylaxis. Furthermore, OAC might reduce the all-cause mortality rate compared with APT and should be considered as the first choice of oral antithrombotic drugs in patients with AFL and CKD.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: How to Use Antithrombotics in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred method for management of severe aortic stenosis in patients who are at high and intermediate surgical risk, and has recently gained approval from the Food and Drug Administration in the US for use in patients at low risk for surgery. Thrombocytopenia and thromboembolic events in patients undergoing TAVR is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and yet there is insufficient evidence supporting the current guideline-mediated therapy for antithrombotics post-TAVR. In this article, the authors review current guidelines for antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing TAVR, studies evaluating antiplatelet regimens, and studies evaluating the use of platelet function testing after TAVR. They also offer a potential link between thrombocytopenia and antiplatelet treatments in patients undergoing TAVR.

Single or dual antiplatelet therapy after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: an updated systemic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel as an antiplatelet strategy after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), it is not based on clinical evidence. Here we aim to review updated evidence systemically and assess safety and efficacy of the two antiplatelet regimens.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to retrieve studies involving single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) versus DAPT after TAVR. We screened the records and extracted the data from publications independently. Relative risks (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare the efficacy and safety of SAPT with that of DAPT in fixed-effects model with Mantel-Haenszel method. The quality of evidence was assessed by the scoring system, GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation).

Results

A total of 2,489 patients from 8 studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis. Compared with DAPT, SAPT was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (RR =0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.89; P=0.014) and major/life-threatening bleeding (RR =0.62; 95% CI, 0.50-0.76; P=0.000) in 30 days. Furthermore, there was no significant difference found between SAPT and DAPT group in terms of 30-day stroke (RR =0.85; 95% CI, 0.45-1.63; P=0.631) and death beyond 3 months (RR =0.96; 95% CI, 0.81-1.15; P=0.664).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggests that compared with DAPT, SAPT after TAVR is more likely to lead to a decline of 30-day mortality along with the reduced risk of bleeding and no increased risk of stroke. However, more clinical data and evidence from randomized controlled trials are warranted to clarify the optimal post-TAVR antiplatelet strategy.