Triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy for coronary heart disease patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis

Abstract

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Previous studies have suggested that cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) may be more effective than conventional dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) at improving the clinical outcomes of patients with CHD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, individually published results are inconclusive. The present meta-analysis evaluated controlled clinical studies to compare the clinical outcomes between TAT and DAT in patients with CHD undergoing PCI. Ten controlled clinical studies were included, with a total of 7,670 patients with CHD undergoing PCI. The total number included 3,925 patients treated with DAT (aspirin and clopidogrel) and 3745 patients treated with TAT (addition of cilostazol to DAT). The crude odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated with either the fixed or random effects model. The meta-analysis results indicated that patients in the TAT group had a significantly lower rate of restenosis compared with that of the DAT group (OR=0.59, 95% CI: 0.45–0.77; P<0.001). The rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in the TAT group were significantly lower compared with those in the DAT group (MACE: OR=0.69, 95% CI: 0.56–0.85, P<0.001; TLR: OR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.43–0.88, P=0.008). However, no significant differences between the TAT and DAT groups in terms of mortality rate, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization and stent thrombosis were observed. In conclusion, the results of the present meta-analysis indicated that the efficacy and safety of cilostazol-based TAT therapy is greater than that of conventional DAT therapy for patients with CHD undergoing PCI.