Ticagrelor for Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome in real-world practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Akhmetzhan Maratovich Galimzhanov, Baurzhan Slymovich Azizov

2019

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1016/j.ihj.2019.01.003
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in real-world practice. PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched systematically to obtain relevant Asian observational studies. The meta-analysis included six studies with 27959 participants. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was significantly beneficial in prevention of major adverse cardiac events (MACCEs) (OR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.46-0.83, I2=69%, p=0.001) mainly driven by reducing stroke (OR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.49-0.78, I2=0%, p<0.001). No differences were found between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the risk of cardiovascular mortality (OR=0.66; 95% CI: 0.41-1.06, I2=0%, p=0.09), target vessel revascularization (OR=0.53; 95% CI: 0.21-1.35, I2=82%, p=0.18), major bleeding (OR=1.11; 95% CI: 0.62-2.00, I2=75%, p=0.73), and net adverse clinical and cerebral events (OR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.55-1.04, I2=78%, p=0.09). However, ticagrelor significantly increased the incidence of major/minor (OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.36-2.21, I2=0%, p<0.001) and minor bleeding (OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.29-2.32, I2=0%, p<0.001). Sensitivity analyses did not find consistent effect of ticagrelor on prevention of all-cause death and myocardial infarction. This meta-analysis suggested that ticagrelor might reduce the risk of MACCEs mainly by reducing stroke in Asian patients with ACS without increasing the rates of major bleeding. Ticagrelor did not show a significant effect on other parts of MACCEs. Considerable increase in the risk of major/minor and minor bleeding was observed in ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel users. Further high-quality studies are required to support these findings.