↓ Skip to main content

Should dual antiplatelet therapy be used in patients following coronary artery bypass surgery? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Surgery, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Should dual antiplatelet therapy be used in patients following coronary artery bypass surgery? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
BMC Surgery, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12893-015-0096-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Subodh Verma, Shaun G. Goodman, Shamir R. Mehta, David A. Latter, Marc Ruel, Milan Gupta, Bobby Yanagawa, Mohammed Al-Omran, Nandini Gupta, Hwee Teoh, Jan O. Friedrich

Abstract

We assessed the effectiveness of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) post elective or urgent (i.e., post acute coronary syndrome [ACS]) coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Registry from inception to August 2015. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults undergoing CABG comparing either dual vs. single antiplatelet therapy or higher- vs. lower-intensity DAPT were identified. Nine RCTs (n = 4,887) with up to 1y follow-up were included. Five RCTs enrolled patients post-elective CABG (n = 986). Two multi-centre RCTs enrolled ACS patients who subsequently underwent CABG (n = 2,155). These 7 RCTs compared clopidogrel plus aspirin to aspirin alone. Two other multi-centre RCTs reported on ACS patients who subsequently underwent CABG comparing higher intensity DAPT with either ticagrelor (n = 1,261) or prasugrel (n = 485) plus aspirin to clopidogrel plus aspirin. Post-operative anti-platelet therapy was started when chest tube bleeding was no longer significant, typically within 24-48 h. There were no differences in all-cause mortality in clopidogrel plus aspirin vs. aspirin RCTs; conversely, all-cause mortality was significantly lower in ticagrelor and prasugrel vs. clopidogrel RCTs (risk ratio[RR] 0.49, 95 % confidence interval[CI] 0.33-0.71, p = 0.0002; 2 RCTs, n = 1695; I (2)  = 0 %; interaction p < 0.01 compared to clopidogrel plus aspirin vs aspirin RCTs). There were no differences in myocardial infarctions, strokes, or composite outcomes. Overall, major bleeding was not significantly increased (RR 1.31, 95 % CI 0.81-2.10, p = 0.27; 7 RCTs, n = 4500). There was heterogeneity (I (2)   = 42 %) due almost entirely to higher bleeding reported for the prasugrel RCT which included mainly CABG-related major bleeding (RR 3.15, 95 % CI 1.45-6.87, p = 0.004; 1 RCT, n = 437). Most RCT data for DAPT post CABG is derived from subgroups of ACS patients in DAPT RCTs requiring CABG who resume DAPT post-operatively. Limited RCT data with heterogeneous trial designs suggest that higher intensity (prasugrel or ticagrelor) but not lower intensity (clopidogrel) DAPT is associated with an approximate 50 % lower mortality in ACS patients who underwent CABG based on post-randomization subsets from single RCTs. Large prospective RCTs evaluating the use of DAPT post-CABG are warranted to provide more definitive guidance for clinicians.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Researcher 12 11%
Other 12 11%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 8%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 34 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 7%
Unspecified 2 2%
Mathematics 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 41 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2016.
All research outputs
#15,348,897
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from BMC Surgery
#377
of 1,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,624
of 279,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Surgery
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,320 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.