Benefits and Risks of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review for the 2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack.

Brown DL, Levine DA, Albright K, Kapral MK, Leung LY, Reeves MJ, Sico J, Strong B, Whiteley WN, American Heart Association Stroke Council. Benefits and Risks of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review for the 2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack. Stroke. 2021 Jul 1; 52(7):e468-e479.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack may reduce recurrent stroke but also increase severe bleeding compared with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT). The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association convened an evidence review committee to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits and risks of DAPT compared with SAPT for secondary ischemic stroke prevention. METHODS: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched on December 5, 2019, to identify phase III or IV randomized controlled trials (n = 100) from December 1999 to December 2019. We calculated unadjusted relative risks (RRs) and performed meta-analyses of studies based on the duration of treatment (short [ = 90 days] versus long [ > 90 days]). RESULTS: Three short-duration randomized controlled trials were identified that enrolled mostly patients with minor stroke or high risk transient ischemic attack. In these trials, DAPT, compared with SAPT, was associated with a lower 90-day risk of recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.55-0.83], = 37.1%). There was no significant increase in major bleeding with DAPT in short-duration trials (pooled RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 0.93-3.83], = 8.9%). In 2 long-duration treatment randomized controlled trials (mean treatment duration, 18-40 months), DAPT was not associated with a significant reduction in recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.79-1.02], = 1.4%), but was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (pooled RR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.37-4.30], = 75.5%). CONCLUSIONS: DAPT was more effective than SAPT for prevention of secondary ischemic stroke when initiated early after the onset of minor stroke/high-risk transient ischemic attack and treatment duration was < 90 days. However, when the treatment duration was longer and initiated later after stroke or transient ischemic attack onset, DAPT was not more effective than SAPT for ischemic stroke prevention and it increased the risk of bleeding.