Antiplatelet drugs in cardiovascular prevention: coronary events and stroke: primary prevention

(1) Aspirin reduces the risk of myocardial infarction in men over 40 with no history of cardiovascular disease, and in hypertensive patients of both sexes over that age. But it does not seem to reduce overall mortality, and its risk-benefit ratio is not very favourable because of its gastrointestinal adverse effects. (2) In patients with symptomatic lower-limb arterial disease, ticlopidine and clopidogrel reduce the risk of coronary events.     

Adverse effects and drug interactions of antithrombotic agents used in prevention of ischaemic stroke

Stroke is the third most common cause of death in the US. Primary prevention of stroke can be achieved by control of risk factors including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, elevated cholesterol levels and smoking. Approximately one-third of all ischaemic strokes occur in patients with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). The mainstay of secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke is the addition of medical therapy with antithrombotic agents to control the risk factors for stroke. Antithrombotic therapy is associated with significant medical complications, particularly bleeding.Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) has been shown to be as effective as high-dose aspirin in the prevention of stroke, with fewer adverse bleeding events. Aspirin has been shown to be as effective as warfarin in the prevention of noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke, with significantly fewer bleeding complications. Ticlopidine may be more effective in preventing stroke than aspirin, but is associated with unacceptable haematological complications. Clopidogrel may have some benefit over aspirin in preventing myocardial infarction, but has not been shown to be superior to aspirin in the prevention of stroke. The combination of clopidogrel and aspirin may be more effective than aspirin alone in acute coronary syndromes, but the incidence of adverse bleeding is significantly higher. Furthermore, the combination of aspirin with clopidogrel has not been shown to be more effective for prevention of recurrent stroke than clopidogrel alone, while the rate of bleeding complications was significantly higher with combination therapy. The combination of aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole has been demonstrated to be more effective than aspirin alone, with the same rate of adverse bleeding complications as low-dose aspirin. When selecting the appropriate antithrombotic agent for secondary prevention of stroke, the adverse event profile of the drug must be taken into account when assessing the overall efficacy of the treatment plan.     

Antiplatelet drugs in cardiovascular prevention: coronary events: acute phase and secondary prevention

(1) Aspirin reduces acute-phase mortality after myocardial infarction, and also reduces the risk of myocardial infarction and death in patients with unstable angina. Aspirin reduces the risk of myocardial infarction in patients with stable angina and after unstable angina, and the risk of relapse after myocardial infarction. It reduces the risk of complications during coronary angioplasty, and the risk of venous coronary bypass graft occlusion after coronary surgery. (2) The best risk-benefit ratio with aspirin is achieved at a daily dose of 75-350 mg; 160 mg/day is the best-validated dose in the acute phase of myocardial infarction. (3) Aspirin must be combined with a thrombolytic agent in patients with myocardial infarction, and with heparin in patients with unstable angina. During coronary stenting the aspirin + clopidogrel combination may have a better risk-benefit ratio than the aspirin + ticlopidine combination. (4) Clopidogrel can be used when aspirin is contraindicated or poorly tolerated. (5) Oral anticoagulants seem a better option than aspirin after complicated myocardial infarction.     

Antiplatelet agents in coronary artery disease

Coronary artery disease pathophysiology and platelet physiology are summarized, and the use of antiplatelet drugs in coronary artery disease is reviewed. Aspirin, sulfinpyrazone, and most other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents alter platelet function by inhibiting the activity of cyclooxygenase, an enzyme necessary for the production of prostaglandins. Drugs that inhibit thromboxane synthetase or antagonize thromboxane A2 at the receptor level are under investigation. Prostacyclin and dipyridamole inhibit platelet function by elevating the concentration of cyclic AMP in platelets, but proof of their efficacy is limited. Most clinical trials of antiplatelet drugs in coronary artery disease have been small and of short duration; many have demonstrated short-term benefits, but long-term benefits are less obvious. Retrospective studies of patients before initial myocardial infarction suggest that regular aspirin ingestion may reduce the occurrence of cardiovascular complications. In prospective trials, the benefit of aspirin therapy for primary prevention of coronary artery disease was balanced by an increased likelihood of stroke. For secondary--after initial infarction--prevention of cardiovascular complications, the administration of aspirin and other antiplatelet agents has consistently decreased the rate of nonfatal myocardial infarction, overall mortality, or both. In the Second International Study of Infarct Survival, patients treated with streptokinase plus aspirin showed the greatest reduction in mortality, while each drug alone was associated with significantly lower mortality than placebo. Aspirin may improve clinical outcome in patients with or without previous myocardial infarction or with unstable angina pectoris. The daily dose should not exceed 325 mg. Antiplatelet therapy should not be used in patients at high risk for bleeding.     

Primary and secondary stroke prevention with antiplatelet drugs

Aspirin is not effective in the primary prevention of stroke. Patients with TIA or ischemic stroke carry a risk of recurrent stroke between 5 and 20% per year. In patients with TIA or ischemic stroke of noncardiac origin antiplatelet drugs are able to decrease the risk of stroke by 11-15% and the risk of stroke, MI and vascular death by 15-22%. Aspirin is the most widely used drug. It is affordable and effective. Low doses of 50-325 mg aspirin are as effective as high doses and cause less gastrointestinal side effects. Severe bleeding complications are dose-dependent. The combination of aspirin with slow release dipyridamole is superior to aspirin alone for stroke prevention. Clopidgrel is superior to aspirin in patients at high risk of recurrence. The combination of aspirin plus clopidogrel is not more effective than clopidogrel alone but carries a higher bleeding risk. None of the antiplatelet agents is able to reduce mortality.     

Cardioprotective effects and gastrointestinal risks of aspirin: Maintaining the delicate balance

Aspirin is a very useful medication for the prevention of cardiovascular thrombotic events in patients with or those at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Aspirin, however, carries an increased risk for gastrointestinal (GI) injury (e.g., ulceration) and its complications (e.g., hemorrhage), which may be caused by its antiplatelet and gastric mucosal effects. In those with established CVD, aspirin use has been documented to decrease the risk of a first myocardial infarction (MI). Its effects on stroke and vascular death are less conclusive. The use of aspirin in these individuals is recommended only for those whose risk for cardiovascular events (based on coronary risk assessment tools) is sufficiently high that it outweighs the risk for GI complications. Secondary prevention refers to the use of aspirin to prevent cardiovascular events in patients with established CVD such as an MI, stroke, or angina. The use of aspirin in these individuals is recommended based on a documented decrease in future cardiovascular events and mortality. The risk for GI events with aspirin is at least additive to the risk for these events in those who also are receiving therapy with a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Patients being treated with aspirin, even at 81 mg/day for cardioprotection, should be assessed for factors that increase the risk for GI injury. Studies have confirmed that co-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or misoprostol decreases the risk for GI injury and complications. Although both classes of such gastroprotective agents are effective, treatment with a PPI is tolerated better, with fewer patients discontinuing the drug because of side effects such as diarrhea.     

Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events

There is significant evidence that low-dose aspirin is effective in preventing the first myocardial infarction in men and ischemic stroke in women. There is also an increased risk for major gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage and a suggestive, but nonsignificant, increase in the risk for hemorrhagic stroke. If there is a history of ulcer disease or upper-gastrointestinal tract bleeding, Helicobacter pylori should be eradicated (if present) and a proton pump inhibitor used with aspirin therapy. In conclusion, the benefits of low-dose aspirin (75-162 mg/day) in the prevention of myocardial infarction in men and thrombotic stroke in women generally outweigh the risks of serious bleeding in adults with a coronary heart disease risk >1% per year or >1% in 10 years.     

Guidelines for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major independent risk factor for stroke. AF is most commonly associated with nonvalvular cardiovascular disease and is especially frequent among the elderly. The annual risk for stroke in patients with AF is approximately 5% with a wide range depending on the presence of additional risk factors. For patients who cannot successfully be converted and maintained in normal sinus rhythm (NSR), antithrombotic therapy is an effective method for preventing stroke. The 2 drugs which are indicated for stroke prophylaxis in patients with AF are warfarin and aspirin. For primary prevention, warfarin reduces the risk of stroke approximately 68%. Aspirin therapy is less effective, resulting in a 20 to 30% risk reduction. Combination therapy with aspirin and low intensity warfarin adjusted to an International Normalised Ratio (INR) of 1.2 to 1.5 has not been shown to be superior to standard intensity warfarin with a target INR of 2.0 to 3.0. In patients with AF and a prior history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), the absolute risk reduction with warfarin is even greater because of the high risk of stroke in this population. In contrast, aspirin has not been shown to significantly reduce the risk of stroke in patients with AF when used for secondary prevention. When appropriately managed, warfarin is associated with a low risk of major bleeding. In controlled trials of highly selected patients, the annual rate of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) with warfarin was approximately 0.3%. Studies have shown that specialty anticoagulation clinics can achieve similar low rates of major bleeding. However, these results cannot be extrapolated to the general population. Factors which have been identified as predictors of bleeding include advanced age, number of medications and most importantly, the intensity of anticoagulation. INR values above 4.0 have been associated with an increased risk of major bleeding while values below 2.0 have been associated with thrombosis. Slow careful dosage titration, regular laboratory monitoring and patient education can substantially reduce the risk of complications. In patients with AF, antithrombotic therapy has been shown to be cost effective. For high risk patients, warfarin is the most cost-effective therapy, provided the risks for bleeding are minimised. In contrast, aspirin is the most cost-effective agent for low risk patients. Current practice guidelines for stroke prophylaxis recommend warfarin (target INR 2.5: range 2.0 to 3.0) for AF patients at high risk for stroke including those over 75 years of age or younger patients with additional risk factors. Aspirin should be reserved for low risk patients or those unable to take warfarin. Although these recommendations are strongly supported by the clinical trial evidence, studies show that many patients are not receiving appropriate antithrombotic therapy. In particular, warfarin is underutilised in high risk elderly patients. Additional studies are needed to identify barriers that prevent implementation of the clinical trial findings into clinical practice.     

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in the elderly: current status and future directions

The role of aspirin in the secondary prevention of occlusive cardiovascular events has now been well established. Given this, aspirin in primary prevention has been the focus of several large trials and subsequent meta-analyses over the past 3 decades, and yet the issue remains controversial. Recent studies in populations with high baseline risk - such as diabetics and those with asymptomatic peripheral arterial disease - have not found the expected benefits of aspirin on cardiovascular endpoints, which contrasts with earlier studies that reported a reduced relative risk for outcomes such as myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke, but not for mortality. Furthermore, in healthy populations, the absolute risk reduction conferred by aspirin is small and needs to be balanced against the risk of a major haemorrhage. Older adults have a higher risk for cardiovascular events and therefore might represent the group in which aspirin for primary prevention could deliver the greatest absolute benefit, yet at the same time, the elderly bear an increased vulnerability to major haemorrhage, including haemorrhagic stroke. It is also not known whether older adults experience the same risk reduction from aspirin as middle-aged individuals. The current evidence base does not sufficiently clarify whether aspirin for primary prevention confers a meaningful net benefit in the elderly.     

Epidemiology and costs of hypertension-related disorders

Epidemiological surveys demonstrate undoubtedly that cardiovascular disorders caused or associated with hypertension are at a high risk of non-fatal or fatal events and occurring with a great rate. Ischaemic heart disease with effort angina and myocardial infarction, often unrecognized myocardial infarction, stroke and transient ischaemic attack may be observed more frequently than other cardiovascular disorders in hypertensive patients. Large-scale trials do not support the hypothesis that effective benefits are reached by current non-pharmacological or pharmacological prevention which need enormous costs to public health. Lowering blood pressure is the main target to reach in an attempt to reduce cardiovascular complications in hypertensive patients. Therefore, the costs-benefit ratio, which estimates public health costs, needs yet marked improvement since the public health expenses are heaviest with results that do not support the economic effort. Statistically, quantitative measures to modify the current regimen need to better evaluate both public health costs and reached benefits.     

Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular events in the elderly

Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), the most widely used antiplatelet drug, is clinically effective for the prevention of vascular ischaemic events. Very few primary or secondary prevention trials address the benefit-risk ratio of aspirin in the elderly. In secondary prevention, it is generally accepted that the beneficial effect of aspirin in the general patient population, demonstrated by randomised controlled trials, can be extrapolated to the elderly. Elderly patients are at relatively high risk for the development of vascular disease and might also be expected to derive substantial benefit from regular aspirin administration. However, there is no consensus about the definition of elderly and no specific prospective trial conducted in elderly subjects is available. Retrospective studies in the elderly found that the benefit provided by aspirin in older patients was similar or increased compared with younger individuals. In primary prevention, the potential benefit of antiplatelet agents must be balanced against the risk of bleeding, which is higher in older patients. The risk-benefit trade-off from the use of low-dose aspirin in the elderly is not yet established and caution should be exercised when using aspirin in primary prevention. In conclusion, aspirin should only be given for primary and secondary prevention in the elderly after a comprehensive evaluation of an individual patient's thrombotic and haemorrhagic risk has been conducted.     

Clopidogrel: a review of its use in the prevention of atherothrombosis

Clopidogrel is an ADP receptor antagonist that is indicated for the reduction of atherosclerotic events including myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke and vascular death in patients with atherosclerosis manifested by recent stroke, myocardial infarction or established peripheral vascular disease. In the 19 185 patients enrolled in the multicentre, randomised double-blind CAPRIE study, the annual risk of the combined end-point of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction and death from vascular disease (vascular death) was significantly lower during treatment with clopidogrel 75 mg/day than aspirin 325 mg/day [5.3 vs 5.8%/year, respectively; relative risk reduction (RRR) 8.7%, p = 0.043] after a mean follow-up of 1.9 years. Clopidogrel provided even greater reductions in the risk of recurrent ischaemic events than aspirin in patients with a history of coronary artery bypass surgery, diabetes mellitus and in those receiving concomitant lipid-lowering therapy. Moreover there was a significant reduction in the incidence of hospitalisation in patients treated with clopidogrel. In a patient population (Saskatchewan, Canada) with a greater risk of ischaemic events than the CAPRIE study population, the number of patients needed to be treated with clopidogrel to prevent 1 ischaemic event was estimated to be 70 (vs 200 in the CAPRIE study). In randomised trials and registry surveys, clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin had similar efficacy (as measured by adverse cardiac outcomes) to ticlopidine 250mg twice daily plus aspirin during the 30 days after placement of intracoronary stents. Tolerability of clopidogrel was significantly better than ticlopidine in the randomised, double-blind CLASSICS study. Among patients treated with clopidogrel or aspirin in the CAPRIE study, the overall gastrointestinal tolerability of clopidogrel was generally better than that of aspirin; the frequency of gastrointestinal haemorrhage was significantly lower among patients treated with clopidogrel than aspirin. Diarrhoea, rash and pruritis were significantly more common with clopidogrel than aspirin. CONCLUSION: Clopidogrel was significantly more effective than aspirin in the prevention of vascular events (ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death) [corrected] in patients with atherothrombotic disease manifested by recent myocardial infarction, recent ischaemic stroke or symptomatic peripheral arterial occlusive disease [corrected] in the CAPRIE study. The overall tolerability profile of the drug was similar to that of aspirin, although gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred significantly less often in clopidogrel recipients. The drug is widely used in combination with aspirin for the prevention of atherothrombosis after placement of intravascular stents, and available data suggest that this combination is as effective as ticlopidine plus aspirin for this indication.     

Safety of clopidogrel and aspirin for stroke prevention: implications of the CHARISMA trial.

Antiplatelet therapy is universally recommended for the prevention of recurrent events in patients with noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), acute and chronic coronary artery disease, or peripheral arterial disease. However, choosing which antiplatelet agents to use in these situations remains controversial. The use of aspirin, aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole, or clopidogrel is recommended as initial therapy in patients with noncardioembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular events. Based on the results of the MATCH trial, combination therapy with aspirin plus clopidogrel is not recommended for patients with ischaemic stroke or TIA due to the increased risk of haemorrhage.The results of the CHARISMA trial support this recommendation; despite previous data demonstrating a favourable benefit-risk profile of aspirin plus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome, this combination should not be used in patients at high risk for atherothrombosis and those with previous stroke or TIA. In these patients, the CHARISMA trial demonstrated a lack of significant clinical efficacy and an increased risk of bleeding with clopidogrel plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone.Further research is needed to assess the benefit-risk ratio of clopidogrel plus aspirin in specific subpopulations of patients at high risk for atherothrombotic events, and to determine the role of clopidogrel plus aspirin in preventing cardioembolic stroke or early recurrent stroke after symptomatic large-vessel atherostenosis. Recent and ongoing studies are seeking to better define the roles of different antiplatelet regimens in preventing recurrent stroke.     

Ischaemic stroke: acute-phase drug therapy. Mostly aspirin and heparin

(1) In the acute phase of ischaemic stroke, antiplatelet or anticoagulant treatments reduce the risk of recurrence and pulmonary embolism, but carry a risk of haemorrhagic transformation. (2) Aspirin has been tested in several placebo-controlled trials and has a positive risk-benefit balance, preventing about 5 deaths per 1000 patients with ischaemic stroke. Aspirin must be given as soon as computed tomography has ruled out intracerebral haemorrhage, unless thrombolytic treatment is planned. (3) Heparin has as many potential benefits as risks: it tends to be beneficial at low doses but harmful at high doses. Low-dose heparin therapy appears to be justified, especially for patients with emboligenic heart disease, tight carotid stenosis, or at risk of pulmonary embolism. Higher-dose heparin is only warranted for the rare patient with a high thrombotic risk. (4) Some thrombolytic drugs can reduce the frequency and severity of complications, but their use carries a high immediate risk of aggravation or death by haemorrhagic transformation. Alteplase has a somewhat positive risk-benefit balance in certain highly specific situations: for example, in some patients with persistent ischaemic stroke who are treated within three hours of onset, and without signs of severe stroke or risk factors for bleeding (high blood pressure, aspirin use). (5) Clinical trials have shown that routine use of "neuroprotective" treatments (calcium channel blockers, haemodilution, parenteral magnesium, oxygen therapy) does not reduce the risk of death or disability. (6) Arterial hypertension frequently occurs in the immediate aftermath of stroke, and then generally subsides. Few clinical trials have evaluated the use of antihypertensive drugs in this setting and there is little evidence of benefit. One trial showed that a sudden drop in blood pressure led to neurological aggravation. Antihypertensive drugs should only be used in stroke patients with severe hypertension or cardiac complications. (7) Cerebral oedema is an important cause of death after stroke: treatments (especially mannitol, mechanical ventilation and neurosurgery) have been poorly evaluated. (8) Other treatments recommended only for patients with persistent complications include oxygen therapy, antibiotics, paracetamol, insulin, and anticonvulsants. (9) A controversial meta-analysis suggested that management by a specialised multidisciplinary team reduced the mid-term risk of death and disability in comparison with management in a non specialised unit.     

Clopidogrel: new preparation. An alternative to aspirin

(1) Clopidogrel, an antiplatelet drug chemically similar to ticlopidine, is marketed in France for secondary prevention of thrombotic complications in patients with a history of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke or peripheral arterial disease. (2) Marketing authorisation was based mainly on the CAPRIE trial, a study that involved 19,815 patients. In this trial of secondary cardiovascular prevention, clopidogrel was slightly more effective than aspirin (325 mg/day) according to a statistical analysis of a combined end point (ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction, or death of vascular causes). The difference was more marked in the subgroup of patients with obstructive arterial disease of the lower limbs. (3) Clopidogrel was well tolerated in this trial. The only adverse effects more frequent on clopidogrel than on aspirin were rash and diarrhoea. (4) Clopidogrel showed no haematological toxicity, an adverse effect that restricts the use of ticlopidine. (5) The lack of long-term follow-up in real clinical settings prevents any meaningful estimation of the safety profile or of the risk of drug interactions.     

Selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and myocardial infarction: how strong is the link?

There are concerns that selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors may be prothrombotic and increase the risk of myocardial infarction. This has largely arisen because of an unexpected finding of a higher rate of myocardial infarction in patients receiving rofecoxib compared with patients receiving naproxen in a study of gastrointestinal toxicity. The results of this study, a similar study of celecoxib versus ibuprofen or diclofenac, and data obtained from a meta-analysis of aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) primary prevention trials suggest that differences in the rates of myocardial infarction between rofecoxib and naproxen may have been due to an unexpectedly low rate of myocardial infarction in patients receiving naproxen. However, population surveillance data also suggest that rofecoxib may be associated with a greater risk of myocardial infarction than celecoxib and certain nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The magnitude of this increase in risk, if real, is uncertain but it is likely to be relatively small in patients for whom cardiovascular prophylaxis with aspirin is not indicated. Patients who require nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory therapy for arthritis and who are at high risk of cardiovascular disease should receive aspirin, probably in conjunction with selective COX-2 inhibitor therapy, as the risk of gastrointestinal ulceration may be lower than for aspirin plus a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. In patients who do not require aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular events, the lower risk of gastrointestinal ulceration associated with COX-2 inhibitor compared with non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs would be expected to outweigh any increase in the risk of myocardial infarction, if one exists.     

Pharmacogenomics of platelet responsiveness to aspirin

Aspirin is the most widely used drug in the world for cardiovascular protection. Aspirin's ability to suppress platelet function varies widely among individuals and lesser suppression of platelet function is associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death. Platelet response to aspirin is a complex phenotype involving multiple genes and molecular pathways. Aspirin response phenotypes can be categorized as directly or indirectly related to cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) activity, with phenotypic variation indirectly related to COX-1 being much more prominent. Recent data indicate that variability in platelet response to aspirin is genetically determined, but the specific gene variants that contribute to phenotypic variation are not known. An understanding of the relationship between genotype, aspirin response phenotype and clinical outcome will help to bring about a personalized approach to antiplatelet therapy that maximizes antithrombotic benefit whilst minimizing bleeding risk for individual patients.     

Antiplatelet drugs in cardiovascular prevention: stroke: acute phase and secondary prevention

(1) In the acute phase of ischaemic stroke in patients free of thrombogenic heart disease, combined treatment with aspirin + moderate-dose unfractionated heparin reduces the risk of relapse and death. Unfractionated heparin at higher anticoagulant doses has an unfavourable risk-benefit ratio. Treatment is controversial in patients with events associated with atrial fibrillation. (2) After ischaemic stroke in patients free of thrombogenic heart disease, aspirin reduces the risk of relapse and death. Other antiplatelet drugs, the aspirin + dipyridamole combination, ticlopidine and clopidogrel have similar efficacy to aspirin. (3) The risk-benefit ratio of oral anticoagulant is favourable after ischaemic stroke associated with atrial fibrillation; but it is unfavourable after stroke without thrombogenic heart disease.     

Incremental Effect of Clopidogrel on Important Outcomes in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the impact of clopidogrel plus aspirin on the individual outcomes of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke in patients with established cardiovascular disease, or in patients with multiple risk factors for vascular disease. BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have demonstrated a reduction in composite outcomes when clopidogrel is added to aspirin therapy in patients with coronary artery disease; however, the magnitude of benefit on individual outcomes is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on randomized, controlled trials that compared aspirin plus clopidogrel with aspirin plus placebo for the treatment of coronary artery disease. RESULTS: This analysis included five randomized trials (CURE, CREDO, CLARITY, COMMIT, and CHARISMA) in 79 624 patients. The incidence of all-cause mortality was 6.3% in the aspirin plus clopidogrel group versus 6.7% in the aspirin group (odds ratio [OR] 0.94; 95% CI 0.89, 0.99; p = 0.026). The incidence of myocardial infarction was 2.7% and 3.3% (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.75, 0.89; p < 0.0001), and stroke was 1.2% and 1.4% (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73, 0.93; p = 0.002). Similarly, the incidence of major bleeding was 1.6% and 1.3% (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.11, 1.41; p < 0.0001), and fatal bleeding was 0.28% and 0.27% (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.76, 1.43; p = 0.79). CONCLUSION: The addition of clopidogrel to aspirin results in a small reduction in all-cause mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and a modest reduction in myocardial infarction and stroke in patients with cardiovascular disease. The overall incidence of major bleeding however is increased, although there is no excess of fatal bleeds or hemorrhagic strokes.     

Antiplatelet therapy in atherothrombotic cardiovascular diseases for primary and secondary prevention: a focus on old and new antiplatelet agents

Aspirin has long been the mainstay of primary and secondary prevention against myocardial infarction and ischemic cerebrovascular events. However, the incremental value of aspirin for primary prevention has recently been subject to debate given data from recent large clinical trials, as the net clinical benefit is small. In secondary prevention, aspirin is still strongly recommended. Efforts in obtaining more efficient antiplatelet agents and to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality have led to the development of new adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor antagonists, which are superior to clopidogrel. New generation antiplatelet drugs i.e. prasugrel and ticagrelor aim to reduce atherothrombotic events, mortality and stent thrombosis, as well as overcome low- or non-response to clopidogrel. Further agents with antiplatelet properties are being investigated at present. This overview aims to give insights into the rapidly changing field of antiplatelet strategies in cardiovascular diseases.