You are accessing a medical content website
Are you a health professional?

Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition) Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition)
Rev Esp Cardiol. 2018;71:257-66 - Vol. 71 Num.04 DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2017.06.012

Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Regimen With or Without Anticoagulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Indirect Comparison and Meta-analysis

Monica Verdoia a, Lucia Barbieri a,b, Matteo Nardin a,c, Harry Suryapranata d, Giuseppe De Luca a,

a Division of Cardiology, Azienda Ospedaliera-Universitaria “Maggiore della Carità”, Eastern Piedmont University, Novara, Italy
b Department of Cardiology, Ospedale S. Andrea, Vercelli, Italy
c Department of Medicine, ASST “Spedali Civili”, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
d Department of Cardiology, University Medical Centre St Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Refers to

Free articleAntithrombotic Therapy After Percutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation: Large Gaps for a Matter of Extreme Importance
Íñigo Lozano, Juan Rondán, José M. Vegas, Eduardo Segovia
Rev Esp Cardiol. 2018;71:308
Full text - PDF


Antiplatelet therapy. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Meta-analysis.


Introduction and objectives

There is uncertainty on the correct management of antithrombotic therapies after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) being currently recommended on an empirical basis. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to assess the safety and effectiveness of DAPT in patients undergoing TAVR.


Studies comparing different antithrombotic regimens after TAVR were included. The primary endpoint was 30-day overall mortality.


We included 9 studies, 5 comparing DAPT with aspirin monotherapy and 4 comparing DAPT with monoantiplatelet therapy (MAPT) + oral anticoagulation. Among 7991 patients, 72% were on DAPT. The median follow-up was 3.5 months. Mortality was significantly lower in the DAPT group (12.2% vs 14.4%; OR, 0.81; 95%CI, 0.70-0.93; P = .003; Phet = .93), with similar benefits compared with aspirin monotherapy (OR, 0.80; 95%CI, 0.69-0.93; P = .004; Phet = .60), which were not statistically significant when compared with MAPT + oral anticoagulation (OR, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.55-1.35; P = .51; Phet = .97). A similar trend for DAPT was observed for stroke (OR, 0.83 95%CI, 0.63-1.10; P = .20; Phet = .67), with no increase in the rate of major bleedings (OR, 1.69; 95%CI, 0.86-3.31; P = .13; Phet< .0001). On indirect comparison analysis, no benefit in survival, stroke, or bleedings was identified for additional oral anticoagulation.


The present meta-analysis supports the use of DAPT after TAVR, reducing mortality and offering slight benefits in stroke, with no increase in major bleedings compared with MAPT. The strategy of aspirin + oral anticoagulation did not provide significant benefits compared with MAPT or DAPT.

1885-5857/© 2018 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved