• Podda, Gian Marco
• Minardi, Alessandro
• Birocchi, Simone
• Squizzato, Alessandro
• Rocchetti, Matteo
• Cattaneo, Marco

Abstract

<jats:p>Background:The value of guided therapy (GT) with anti-P2Y12 drugs in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unclear. Meta-analyses lumped together randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with heterogeneous designs, comparing either genotype-GT or platelet function test (PFT)-GT with unguided therapy. Some meta-analysis also included RCTs that did not explore GT, but the effects of switching patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to alternative therapies (HTPR-Therapy). We performed 3 distinct systematic reviews/meta-analyses, each exploring only RCTs with homogeneous design. Methods. MEDLINE, Embase and Central databases were searched for RCTs testing genotype-GT, PFT-GT or HTPR-Therapy in PCI-treated patients, through October 1st 2022. Two reviewers extracted the data. Risk ratios (RR) (95% confidence intervals) were calculated. Primary outcomes were major bleedings (MB) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Results: In 7 genotype-GT RCTs, RR were: MB, 1.06 (0.73–1.54; p=0.76); MACE, 0.65 (0.47–0.91); p=0.01), but significant risk reduction was observed in RCTs performed in China (0.30, 0.16-0.54; p&lt;0.0001) and not elsewhere (0.75, 0.48-1.18; p=0.21). In 6 PFT-GT RCTs, RR were: MB, 0.91 (0.64-1.28, p=0.58); MACE, 0.82 (0.56 –1.19; p=0.30): 0.62 (0.42-0.93; p=0.02) in China, 1.08 (0.82-1.41; p=0.53) elsewhere.In 8 HTPR-Therapy RCTs, RR were: MB, 0.71 (0.41-1.23; p=0.22); MACE, 0.57 (0.44–0.75; p&lt;0.0001): 0.56 (0.43-0.74, p&lt;0.0001) in China, 0.58 (0.27-1.23, p=0.16) elsewhere.Conclusion: No GT strategy affected MB. Overall, genotype-GT but not PFT-GT reduced MACE. However, genotype-GT and PFT-GT reduced MACE in China, but not elsewhere. PFT-GT performed poorly compared to HTPR-Therapy, likely due to inaccurate identification of HTPR patients by PFT. </jats:p>

Topics

• impedance spectroscopy