Cited by 40Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics

Lack of Evidence for Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Endovascular Arterial Procedures: A Meta-analysis

Open access
Peeters Weem, S.M.O., van Haelst, S.T.W., den Ruijter, H.M., Moll, F.L., de Borst, G.J.·2016·European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

Abstract

Introduction Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has mainly replaced mono antiplatelet therapy (MAPT) and is recommended after arterial endovascular revascularization. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the available evidence for DAPT after endovascular revascularization throughout the arterial system.Methods A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Register. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment tool. Included in the search were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT with MAPT after endovascular procedures for the treatment of coronary, carotid, or peripheral artery disease, reporting at least one clinical outcome. Articles were excluded if patients received anticoagulation in addition to antiplatelet therapy in the post-procedural phase. The primary outcome was restenosis or stent thrombosis, and secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target lesion revascularization, cerebrovascular accident or transient ischemic attack, bleeding, and death. Meta-analyses of binary outcomes were performed using the random effects model and described as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Chi-square tests were used to test for heterogeneity.Results Nine articles were included in this study, involving lower limb peripheral arteries (1), carotid arteries (2), and coronary arteries (6). The pooled results of coronary trials showed a RR for restenosis with DAPT of 0.60 (95% CI 0.28-1.31) and for myocardial infarction 0.49 (95% CI 0.12-2.03). In the carotid artery trials the RR for restenosis was 0.22 (95% CI 0.04-1.20) and for peripheral arteries 1.02 (95% CI 0.56-1.82). A meta-analysis of bleeding risk of all the included trials showed a RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.32-3.52) with DAPT.Conclusion The available evidence comparing DAPT with MAPT after endovascular arterial revascularization is limited and the majority of trials were conducted in the cardiology field. No significant evidence for superiority of DAPT compared with MAPT was found, but there was also no evidence of an increased bleeding risk with DAPT over MAPT.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.04.023

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Meta-analysis found no significant advantage of dual versus mono antiplatelet therapy after endovascular arterial revascularization in restenosis or stent thrombosis, but increased bleeding risk with dual antiplatelet therapy.

    “A meta-analysis comparing dual antiplatelet versus mono antiplatelet therapy after endovascular arterial revascularization found no significant advantage in restenosis or stent thrombosis but showed an increased risk of bleeding with dual antiplatelet therapy [81].”

    From Revascularization Strategies for Acute and Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia: A Narrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [81]

    The Discussion (p. 6) reports no significant reduction in restenosis or stent thrombosis with dual therapy, supporting that part of the claim. But it explicitly says the pooled risk of bleeding was not significantly different; the bleeding analysis (p. 6) reports confidence intervals that include no difference. The claim overstates the bleeding finding as an increased risk. (LLM, conf=0.93)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peeters Weem, S. M. O., van Haelst, S. T. W., den Ruijter, H. M., Moll, F. L., & de Borst, G. J.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Venue
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pages
253-262
ISSN
1078-5884 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2404820780
Cited by
40
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Peripheral Artery Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Keywords
dual antiplatelet therapy, endovascular revascularization, coronary artery disease, carotid artery disease, peripheral arterial disease, restenosis, stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiac events, bleeding risk, target lesion revascularization, cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, risk of bias
MeSH terms
Arterial Occlusive Diseases, Carotid Artery Diseases, Coronary Disease, Drug Therapy, Combination, Humans, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors, Postoperative Care, Treatment Outcome, Endovascular Procedures, Peripheral Arterial Disease

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review