Very short vs. long dual antiplatelet therapy after second generation drug-eluting stents in 35 785 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Abstract Aim To provide an updated assessment of the efficacy–safety profile of very short (1 or 3 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compared with long (12 months) DAPT in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). Methods and results Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing very short vs. long DAPT in 35 785 patients undergoing PCI were selected. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint trial-defined major bleeding through at least 1 year. Compared with longer duration, very short DAPT yielded comparable rates of MACE [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–1.03, P = 0.19], all-cause mortality (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80–1.06, P = 0.25), myocardial infarction (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88–1.15, P = 0.91), stroke (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.72–1.50, P = 0.83), stent thrombosis (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80–1.37, P = 0.73), target vessel revascularization (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.82–1.18, P = 0.89), and comparable net clinical benefit (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84–1.01, P = 0.08). Very short DAPT was associated with reduced rates of major bleeding (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40–0.94, P = 0.03) or any bleeding (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47–0.90, P = 0.009). Subgroup analyses showed consistent results for 1 vs. 3 month DAPT and for aspirin vs. P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following very short DAPT. Conclusions Compared with long DAPT, very short DAPT did not increase the odds of ischaemic complications, while reducing the odds of major or any bleeding by over 30%.