Beyond RCTs: Short-term dual antiplatelet therapy in secondary prevention of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack.
Dual antiplatelet therapy
TIA
aspirin
clopidogrel
ischemic stroke
ticagrelor
Journal
European stroke journal
ISSN: 2396-9881
Titre abrégé: Eur Stroke J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101688446
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Jun 2024
13 Jun 2024
Historique:
medline:
13
6
2024
pubmed:
13
6
2024
entrez:
13
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) proved the efficacy of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in secondary prevention of minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack (TIA). We aimed at evaluating effectiveness and safety of short-term DAPT in real-world, where treatment use is broader than in RCTs. READAPT (REAl-life study on short-term Dual Antiplatelet treatment in Patients with ischemic stroke or Transient ischemic attack) (NCT05476081) was an observational multicenter real-world study with a 90-day follow-up. We included patients aged 18+ receiving short-term DAPT soon after ischemic stroke or TIA. No stringent NIHSS and ABCD We included 1920 patients; 69.9% started DAPT after an ischemic stroke; only 8.9% strictly followed entry criteria or procedures of RCTs. Primary effectiveness outcome occurred in 3.9% and primary safety outcome in 0.6% of cases. In total, 3.3% cerebrovascular ischemic recurrences occurred, 0.2% intracerebral hemorrhages, and 2.7% bleedings; 0.2% of patients died due to vascular causes. Patients with NIHSS score ⩽5 and those without acute lesions at neuroimaging had significantly higher primary effectiveness outcomes than their counterparts. Additionally, DAPT start >24 h after symptom onset was associated with a lower likelihood of bleeding. In real-world, most of the patients who receive DAPT after an ischemic stroke or a TIA do not follow RCTs entry criteria and procedures. Nevertheless, short-term DAPT remains effective and safe in this population. No safety concerns are raised in patients with low-risk TIA, more severe stroke, and delayed treatment start.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
UNASSIGNED
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) proved the efficacy of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in secondary prevention of minor ischemic stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack (TIA). We aimed at evaluating effectiveness and safety of short-term DAPT in real-world, where treatment use is broader than in RCTs.
METHODS
UNASSIGNED
READAPT (REAl-life study on short-term Dual Antiplatelet treatment in Patients with ischemic stroke or Transient ischemic attack) (NCT05476081) was an observational multicenter real-world study with a 90-day follow-up. We included patients aged 18+ receiving short-term DAPT soon after ischemic stroke or TIA. No stringent NIHSS and ABCD
RESULTS
UNASSIGNED
We included 1920 patients; 69.9% started DAPT after an ischemic stroke; only 8.9% strictly followed entry criteria or procedures of RCTs. Primary effectiveness outcome occurred in 3.9% and primary safety outcome in 0.6% of cases. In total, 3.3% cerebrovascular ischemic recurrences occurred, 0.2% intracerebral hemorrhages, and 2.7% bleedings; 0.2% of patients died due to vascular causes. Patients with NIHSS score ⩽5 and those without acute lesions at neuroimaging had significantly higher primary effectiveness outcomes than their counterparts. Additionally, DAPT start >24 h after symptom onset was associated with a lower likelihood of bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS
UNASSIGNED
In real-world, most of the patients who receive DAPT after an ischemic stroke or a TIA do not follow RCTs entry criteria and procedures. Nevertheless, short-term DAPT remains effective and safe in this population. No safety concerns are raised in patients with low-risk TIA, more severe stroke, and delayed treatment start.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38869034
doi: 10.1177/23969873241255250
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23969873241255250Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of conflicting interestThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: AZ reports compensation from Angels Initiative, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, CSL Behring, Bayer, and Astra Zeneca; and he is member of ESO guidelines, ISA-AII guidelines, and IRETAS steering committee. RO reports compensations from Novartis and Allergan, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Eli Lilly and Company, SS reports compensations from Novartis, NovoNordisk, Allergan, AstraZeneca, Pfizer Canada, Inc, Eli Lilly and Company, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, H. Lundbeck A/S, and Abbott Canada; employment by Università degli Studi dell’Aquila. MPa reports compensation from Daiichi Sankyo Company, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, and Pfizer Canada, Inc. DT reports compensation from Alexion, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Pfizer. The other authors report no conflicts.