SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2022
Comparison of Short-Term DAPT and Long-Term DAPT on the Prognosis of PCI Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the primary medication for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the best DAPT duration is still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of short-term (3-6 months) DAPT compared to long-term (12 months) DAPT. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science systematically for all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the different strategies for DAPT in patients undergoing PCI within ten years prior to January 2021. Major bleeding and any bleeding were identified as the safe endpoints. All causes of death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite/probable stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and stroke were identified as the efficacy endpoints. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) in each study were abstracted. Results: Overall, 11 trials and 24,242 patients were included in this meta-analysis with 15-month median follow-up time. Short-term DAPT was related to reduced risks of major bleeding (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.89) and any bleeding (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.53-0.79). No obvious differences in any of the other endpoints were observed. In acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with drug-eluting stents (DES), short-term compared with long-term DAPT was related to a decreased risk of major bleeding (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.87) without significant increasing in the risks of any bleeding and ischemic endpoints. Furthermore, short-term DAPT followed by P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy appreciably lowered the risk of major bleeding (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.96) and any bleeding (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.93). There were no obvious differences concerning death between the different strategies for DAPT. Conclusions: After PCI with DES, short-term DAPT is safer than long-term DAPT, and is not inferior in effectiveness, even in ACS patients. P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy following short-term DAPT is also related to a decreased risk of bleeding and may be an alternative anti-platelet strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.