Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Services Research & Development

Veterans Crisis Line Badge
Go to the ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Sullivan AE, Nanna MG, Rao SV, Cantrell S, Gibson CM, Verheugt FWA, Peterson ED, Lopes RD, Alexander JH, Granger CB, Yee MK, Kong DF. A systematic review of randomized trials comparing double versus triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions : Official Journal of The Society For Cardiac Angiography & Interventions. 2019 Nov 11.
PubMed logo Search for Abstract from PubMed
(This link leaves the website of VA HSR&D.)

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Prior randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the optimal antithrombotic therapies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not been powered to evaluate ischemic outcomes. We compared double therapy with oral anticoagulation (OAC) and a P2Y12 inhibitor to triple therapy with an OAC + dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with AF requiring PCI. METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, we searched for RCTs including patients with AF as an indication for OAC and undergoing PCI or medical management of acute coronary syndrome. The results were pooled using fixed-effects and random-effects models to estimate the overall effect of double therapy versus triple therapy on ischemic and bleeding outcomes. RESULTS: We identified four RCTs, comprising 10,238 patients (5,498 double therapy, 4,740 triple therapy). Trial-reported major adverse cardiovascular events were similar between double therapy and triple therapy (fixed effect model OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.94-1.26). However, stent thrombosis (61/5,496 double therapy vs. 33/4738 triple therapy; fixed effect model OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.02-2.40; number needed to treat with triple therapy = 242) favored triple therapy. Bleeding outcomes were less frequent with double therapy (746/5470 vs. 950/4710; fixed effect model OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.53-0.65; number needed to harm with triple therapy = 16), but with significant heterogeneity (Q = 8.33, p = .04; I = 64%), as were intracranial hemorrhages (19/5470 vs. 30/4710; fixed effect model OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Double therapy in patients with AF requiring OAC following PCI or Acute coronary syndrome has a significantly better safety profile than triple therapy but may be associated with a modest increased risk of stent thrombosis.

Questions about the HSR&D website? Email the Web Team.

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.