Antithrombotic therapy in adults with ectatic coronary artery disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Alireza Azarboo, Mohammad Shahabaddin Daneshvar, Alireza Sattari Abroy, Ramin Assempoor, Aryan Taghvaei, Ali Nasrollahizadeh, Mohsen Hajiqasemi, Amirhossein Ghaseminejad-Raeini, Kaveh Hosseini
{"title":"Antithrombotic therapy in adults with ectatic coronary artery disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Alireza Azarboo, Mohammad Shahabaddin Daneshvar, Alireza Sattari Abroy, Ramin Assempoor, Aryan Taghvaei, Ali Nasrollahizadeh, Mohsen Hajiqasemi, Amirhossein Ghaseminejad-Raeini, Kaveh Hosseini","doi":"10.1186/s43044-025-00612-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many studies have validated the use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in coronary artery ectasia (CAE) to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); however, it is not completely known which group of these antithrombotic medications is more effective. The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of different anti-thrombotic treatments in adult patients with CAE.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines as well as PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses and adhered to a registered predetermined methodology noted in the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol. Comprehensive searches were conducted until October 2024. Study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessments were independently performed by two reviewers. The pairwise meta-analysis compared the odds of MACE among patients receiving different antithrombotic therapies versus no treatment. The network meta-analysis (NMA) combined direct and indirect evidence to compare the efficacy of antithrombotic therapies for MACE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our systematic review included 5,039 adult patients suffering from CAE. The odds of MACE were higher in patients with no treatment when compared with those on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and aspirin monotherapy; although patients on anticoagulation demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE, the difference with the no treatment group did not reach statistical significance. Among various types of interventions in NMA, DAPT was the best in the treatment of CAE.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value, DAPT is the most effective treatment in the prevention of MACE for CAE patients, followed by aspirin monotherapy and anticoagulant treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":74993,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology","volume":"77 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11754575/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43044-025-00612-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many studies have validated the use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in coronary artery ectasia (CAE) to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE); however, it is not completely known which group of these antithrombotic medications is more effective. The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of different anti-thrombotic treatments in adult patients with CAE.

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines as well as PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses and adhered to a registered predetermined methodology noted in the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol. Comprehensive searches were conducted until October 2024. Study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessments were independently performed by two reviewers. The pairwise meta-analysis compared the odds of MACE among patients receiving different antithrombotic therapies versus no treatment. The network meta-analysis (NMA) combined direct and indirect evidence to compare the efficacy of antithrombotic therapies for MACE.

Results: Our systematic review included 5,039 adult patients suffering from CAE. The odds of MACE were higher in patients with no treatment when compared with those on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and aspirin monotherapy; although patients on anticoagulation demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE, the difference with the no treatment group did not reach statistical significance. Among various types of interventions in NMA, DAPT was the best in the treatment of CAE.

Conclusions: Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value, DAPT is the most effective treatment in the prevention of MACE for CAE patients, followed by aspirin monotherapy and anticoagulant treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成人扩张性冠状动脉疾病的抗血栓治疗:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析
背景:许多研究已经证实在冠状动脉扩张(CAE)中使用抗血小板或抗凝治疗可以减少主要不良心血管事件(MACE);然而,目前还不完全清楚哪一组抗血栓药物更有效。本系统综述和网络荟萃分析的目的是评估不同抗血栓治疗对成年CAE患者的疗效。方法:本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南的首选报告项目,以及包含网络荟萃分析的系统评价报告的PRISMA扩展声明,并遵循前瞻性系统评价注册(PROSPERO)协议中注明的注册预定方法。到2024年10月为止,进行了全面的搜索。研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估由两位评论者独立完成。两两荟萃分析比较了接受不同抗血栓治疗和未接受治疗的患者发生MACE的几率。网络荟萃分析(NMA)结合直接和间接证据来比较抗血栓治疗对MACE的疗效。结果:我们的系统综述纳入了5039例成年CAE患者。与双重抗血小板治疗(DAPT)和阿司匹林单药治疗的患者相比,未接受治疗的患者发生MACE的几率更高;抗凝治疗组MACE发生率较低,但与未治疗组差异无统计学意义。在NMA的各种干预措施中,DAPT对CAE的治疗效果最好。结论:从累积排序曲线下曲面(SUCRA)值来看,DAPT是预防CAE患者MACE最有效的治疗方法,其次为阿司匹林单药治疗和抗凝治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Unusual presentation of anomalous origin of the right pulmonary artery from the ascending aorta: case report. Effect of atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) on functional status and quality of life (QoL) in heart failure-cardiac resynchronization therapy population. Clinical and angiographic profile of left main coronary artery disease in patients with chronic coronary syndrome: a retrospective study. Comparative safety and effectiveness of cryoballoon versus radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brief comment on "Mitral valve repair and replacement in infectious endocarditis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcome".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1