Background This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between antiplatelet resistance and the risk of procedure-related complications in neurovascular interventions.
Methods We identified relevant articles by searching electronic databases and reviewed the reference lists of selected papers. The risk of adverse events between antiplatelet responders and hyporesponders during neurointervention was compared in eligible clinical studies. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.
Results Of 2134 potentially relevant studies, our search identified 15 studies enrolling a total of 2365 patients. Pooled RRs showed thromboembolic events (TEE) were more frequent in hyporesponders (RR 2.634, 95% CI 1.465 to 4.734). However, hemorrhagic complications did not differ between the two groups (RR 1.236, 95% CI 0.642 to 2.380). In subgroup analysis, hyporesponders showed a higher prevalence of TEE with standard antiplatelet medication, but there was no obvious difference in TEE between the two arms when using a modified antiplatelet medication (RR 3.645, 95% CI 1.537 to 8.646; and RR 1.877, 95% CI 0.749 to 4.751). Studies using stent placement for aneurysms showed a higher TEE rate in hyporesponders (RR 3.221, 95% CI 1.899 to 5.464).
Conclusion Antiplatelet resistance was significantly associated with TEE in neurointervention, and this adverse event was associated with individually-intensified antiplatelet medication as well as the type of neurointerventional procedure. Our findings support the use of antiplatelet resistance assays and tailored antiplatelet medications in neurovascular stent placement as a management strategy to reduce thromboembolic risk.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors EJS: Formal analysis, writing original draft. C-WR: Guarantor, conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, supervision, manuscript review and editing. SP: Data curation. HNL: Validation, manuscript review and editing. HSS: Manuscript review and editing. S-BK: Manuscript review and editing.
Funding This work was supported by a grant from Kyung Hee University in 2016, grant number KHU-2016069.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.