Extended, standard, or De-escalation antiplatelet therapy for patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention? A trial-sequential, bivariate, influential, and network meta-analysis.

Aims: The relative safety and efficacy of de-escalation, extended duration (ED) (>12-months), and standard dual antiplatelet therapy for 12-months (DAPT-12) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial.

Methods And Results: Online databases were queried to identify relevant randomized control trials (RCTs). ED-DAPT, high-potency (HP) DAPT, shorter duration (SD) DAPT, and low-dose (LD) DAPT were compared with DAPT-12. A trial sequential, bivariate, influential, and frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to determine the pooled estimates. A total of 30 RCTs comprising 81 208 (40 839 experimental, 40 369 control arm) patients with CAD were included in the quantitative analysis. On NMA, compared with DAPT-12, all types of de-escalation, HP-DAPT-12, and ED-DAPT strategies had a statistically non-significant difference in the incidence of MACE at a median follow-up of 1-year. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and all-cause mortality between DAPT-12 and all other strategies. The network estimates showed a significantly lower incidence of major bleeding with DAPT for 3-months followed by P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84), while a higher risk of bleeding with HP-DAPT for 12 months (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.16-2.06). The net clinical benefit and rankograms also favoured DAPT-3 (P2Y12) and discouraged the use of HP-DAPT-12 and ED-DAPT. A subgroup analysis of 19 RCTs restricted to patients who presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) mirrored the findings of pooled analysis. A sensitivity analysis revealed no influence of any individual study or individual strategy on net ischemic estimates. The trial sequential analysis (TSA) illustrated a consistently non-significant difference at the interim analysis of trials, reaching the futility area for MACE, while the cumulative Z-values line surpassed the monitoring boundary as well as the required information size for major bleeding favouring de-escalation strategy.

Conclusion: DAPT for three months followed by ticagrelor-only and use of aspirin + clopidogrel after a short period of high potency DAPT appears to be a safe strategy for treating post-PCI patients. However, given the methodological limitations and inclusion of a small number of trials in novel de-escalation strategies, these findings need validation by future large scale RCTs.