Anticoagulants or antiplatelets for secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Heart Pub Date : 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325288
Kuan-Yu Chi, Talal El Zarif, Dimitrios Varrias, Pei-Lun Lee, Yu-Cheng Chang, Junmin Song, Anita Osabutey, Pawel Borkowski, Cho-Han Chiang, Yu Chang, Yu-Shiuan Lin, Michele Nanna, Michael G Nanna
{"title":"Anticoagulants or antiplatelets for secondary prevention of cryptogenic stroke: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Kuan-Yu Chi, Talal El Zarif, Dimitrios Varrias, Pei-Lun Lee, Yu-Cheng Chang, Junmin Song, Anita Osabutey, Pawel Borkowski, Cho-Han Chiang, Yu Chang, Yu-Shiuan Lin, Michele Nanna, Michael G Nanna","doi":"10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with cryptogenic stroke or embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) face a high risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke, but the optimal antithrombotic strategy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants (OACs) versus antiplatelets in these populations, with a focus on subgroup effects by key clinical characteristics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six databases were searched through March 2024 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OACs and antiplatelets in patients with cryptogenic stroke or ESUS. The primary outcome was recurrent ischaemic stroke. Subgroup analyses evaluated treatment effects based on supracardiac atherosclerosis risk, presence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) and signs or risk factors for atrial cardiopathy. Meta-regression with interaction p values was employed to assess differences in treatment effects between subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine RCTs comprising 15 451 participants were included. In the overall population, there was no significant difference in recurrent ischaemic stroke risk between OACs and antiplatelets (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.02; I<sup>2</sup>=0%). Subgroup analyses showed that OACs reduced ischaemic stroke risk in patients with low-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.80; I<sup>2</sup>=0%) compared with those with high-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; I<sup>2</sup>=0%) and evidence of supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.53; I<sup>2</sup>=0%) (p interaction=0.0002). Similarly, OACs were more effective in patients with signs or risk factors for atrial cardiopathy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99; I<sup>2</sup>=0%) than in those without atrial cardiopathy (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.30; I<sup>2</sup>=0%) (p interaction=0.02). There was no significant interaction by PFO status (p interaction=0.28). While the risk of major bleeding risk was comparable between groups (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.44; I<sup>2</sup>=65%), a significantly higher risk of major bleeding other than intracerebral haemorrhage was observed in patients taking OACs compared with antiplatelets (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.43; I<sup>2</sup>=0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OACs are more effective than antiplatelets for preventing ischaemic stroke in patients who had a cryptogenic stroke or ESUS with low-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis or atrial cardiopathy. The findings highlight the need for personalised treatment strategies and further trials in these subgroups.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42024518903.</p>","PeriodicalId":12835,"journal":{"name":"Heart","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-325288","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with cryptogenic stroke or embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) face a high risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke, but the optimal antithrombotic strategy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants (OACs) versus antiplatelets in these populations, with a focus on subgroup effects by key clinical characteristics.

Methods: Six databases were searched through March 2024 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OACs and antiplatelets in patients with cryptogenic stroke or ESUS. The primary outcome was recurrent ischaemic stroke. Subgroup analyses evaluated treatment effects based on supracardiac atherosclerosis risk, presence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) and signs or risk factors for atrial cardiopathy. Meta-regression with interaction p values was employed to assess differences in treatment effects between subgroups.

Results: Nine RCTs comprising 15 451 participants were included. In the overall population, there was no significant difference in recurrent ischaemic stroke risk between OACs and antiplatelets (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.02; I2=0%). Subgroup analyses showed that OACs reduced ischaemic stroke risk in patients with low-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.80; I2=0%) compared with those with high-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; I2=0%) and evidence of supracardiac atherosclerosis (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.53; I2=0%) (p interaction=0.0002). Similarly, OACs were more effective in patients with signs or risk factors for atrial cardiopathy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99; I2=0%) than in those without atrial cardiopathy (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.30; I2=0%) (p interaction=0.02). There was no significant interaction by PFO status (p interaction=0.28). While the risk of major bleeding risk was comparable between groups (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.44; I2=65%), a significantly higher risk of major bleeding other than intracerebral haemorrhage was observed in patients taking OACs compared with antiplatelets (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.43; I2=0%).

Conclusions: OACs are more effective than antiplatelets for preventing ischaemic stroke in patients who had a cryptogenic stroke or ESUS with low-risk supracardiac atherosclerosis or atrial cardiopathy. The findings highlight the need for personalised treatment strategies and further trials in these subgroups.

Prospero registration number: CRD42024518903.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Heart
Heart 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
320
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart is an international peer reviewed journal that keeps cardiologists up to date with important research advances in cardiovascular disease. New scientific developments are highlighted in editorials and put in context with concise review articles. There is one free Editor’s Choice article in each issue, with open access options available to authors for all articles. Education in Heart articles provide a comprehensive, continuously updated, cardiology curriculum.
期刊最新文献
Prognostic implications of iron deficiency in patients with atrial fibrillation, with and without chronic heart failure. Effects of routine invasive management on reinfarction risk in older adults with frailty and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a subanalysis of a randomised clinical trial. Albuminuria and cardiovascular outcomes in early-stage chronic kidney disease. Shaping the future of cardiovascular medicine: advancing morphological atlases. The ICAM1 p.K56M variant and risk of heart failure in chronic kidney disease: the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort study.
×
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