Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

Patrizia Natale, Suetonia C Palmer, Valeria M Saglimbene, Marinella Ruospo, Mona Razavian, Jonathan C Craig, Meg J Jardine, Angela C Webster, Giovanni Fm Strippoli, Patrizia Natale, Suetonia C Palmer, Valeria M Saglimbene, Marinella Ruospo, Mona Razavian, Jonathan C Craig, Meg J Jardine, Angela C Webster, Giovanni Fm Strippoli

Abstract

Background: Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

Selection criteria: We selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

Data collection and analysis: Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Main results: We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

Authors' conclusions: Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01709994 NCT01155765 NCT01090037 NCT00979589 NCT00050817 NCT00776828 NCT00067119 NCT03289520 NCT00089895 NCT00110448 NCT01252056 NCT02578537 NCT01225562 NCT01328470 NCT02163954 NCT02406911 NCT00391872 NCT00234585 NCT02022748 NCT00526474 NCT00527943 NCT00097591 NCT00496769 NCT01082874 NCT00611286 NCT01173666 NCT00059306 NCT00320008 NCT00699998 NCT02663713 NCT03387826 NCT03796156 NCT02895113 NCT01198379 NCT01743014 NCT02394145 NCT02459288 NCT03039205 NCT03150667 NCT03649711 NCT01165567 NCT02294643 NCT01869881 NCT03357874.

Conflict of interest statement

Editorial contributions
  1. Sign‐off Editor (final editorial decision): Dr Elisabeth Hodson

Copyright © 2022 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram; study identification and selection process.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies
3
3
Funnel plot of comparison of antiplatelet agents versus control for the outcome of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 2: Fatal or nonfatal stroke
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 3: Death (any cause)
1.4. Analysis
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 4: Haemorrhagic stroke
1.5. Analysis
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 5: Cardiovascular death
1.6. Analysis
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 6: Fatal bleeding
1.7. Analysis
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 7: Major bleeding
1.8. Analysis
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 8: Minor bleeding
1.9. Analysis
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 9: Kidney failure
1.10. Analysis
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 10: Doubling of serum creatinine
1.11. Analysis
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 11: Kidney transplant graft loss
1.12. Analysis
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 12: Transplant rejection
1.13. Analysis
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 13: Creatinine clearance
1.14. Analysis
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 14: Proteinuria
1.15. Analysis
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 15: Dialysis access failure (thrombosis or loss of patency)
1.16. Analysis
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 16: Early access thrombosis (before 8 weeks)
1.17. Analysis
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 17: Loss of primary unassisted patency
1.18. Analysis
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 18: Failure to attain suitability for dialysis
1.19. Analysis
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 19: Need for intervention to attain patency or assist maturation
1.20. Analysis
1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 20: Hospitalisation (any cause)
1.21. Analysis
1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 21: Cardiovascular hospitalisation
1.22. Analysis
1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1: Antiplatelet agents versus control, Outcome 22: Treatment withdrawal
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Prasugrel versus clopidogrel, Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
2.2. Analysis
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: Prasugrel versus clopidogrel, Outcome 2: Death (any cause)
2.3. Analysis
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2: Prasugrel versus clopidogrel, Outcome 3: Cardiovascular death
2.4. Analysis
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2: Prasugrel versus clopidogrel, Outcome 4: Major bleeding
2.5. Analysis
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2: Prasugrel versus clopidogrel, Outcome 5: Minor bleeding
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 2: Fatal or nonfatal stroke
3.3. Analysis
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 3: Death (any cause)
3.4. Analysis
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 4: Cardiovascular death
3.5. Analysis
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 5: Fatal bleeding
3.6. Analysis
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 6: Major bleeding
3.7. Analysis
3.7. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 7: Minor bleeding
3.8. Analysis
3.8. Analysis
Comparison 3: Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, Outcome 8: Treatment withdrawal
4.1. Analysis
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4: Clopidogrel (low dose) versus clopidogrel (high dose), Outcome 1: Haemorragic stroke
4.2. Analysis
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4: Clopidogrel (low dose) versus clopidogrel (high dose), Outcome 2: Cardiovascular death
5.1. Analysis
5.1. Analysis
Comparison 5: Abciximab versus tirofiban, Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
5.2. Analysis
5.2. Analysis
Comparison 5: Abciximab versus tirofiban, Outcome 2: Death (any cause)
6.1. Analysis
6.1. Analysis
Comparison 6: Defibrotide versus dypiridamole, Outcome 1: Death (any cause)
6.2. Analysis
6.2. Analysis
Comparison 6: Defibrotide versus dypiridamole, Outcome 2: Cardiovascular death
6.3. Analysis
6.3. Analysis
Comparison 6: Defibrotide versus dypiridamole, Outcome 3: Fatal bleeding
6.4. Analysis
6.4. Analysis
Comparison 6: Defibrotide versus dypiridamole, Outcome 4: Kidney transplant graft loss
7.1. Analysis
7.1. Analysis
Comparison 7: Cilostazol versus sarpogrelate, Outcome 1: Major bleeding
8.1. Analysis
8.1. Analysis
Comparison 8: Beraprost versus cilostazol or sarpogrelate, Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
8.2. Analysis
8.2. Analysis
Comparison 8: Beraprost versus cilostazol or sarpogrelate, Outcome 2: Fatal or nonfatal stroke
8.3. Analysis
8.3. Analysis
Comparison 8: Beraprost versus cilostazol or sarpogrelate, Outcome 3: Death (any cause)
8.4. Analysis
8.4. Analysis
Comparison 8: Beraprost versus cilostazol or sarpogrelate, Outcome 4: Cardiovascular death
8.5. Analysis
8.5. Analysis
Comparison 8: Beraprost versus cilostazol or sarpogrelate, Outcome 5: Fatal bleeding
9.1. Analysis
9.1. Analysis
Comparison 9: Primary/secondary prevention for fatal/non fatal myocardial infarction (subgroup analysis), Outcome 1: Secondary prevention
10.1. Analysis
10.1. Analysis
Comparison 10: Sensitivity analysis (adequate allocation concealment), Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
10.2. Analysis
10.2. Analysis
Comparison 10: Sensitivity analysis (adequate allocation concealment), Outcome 2: Death (any cause)
10.3. Analysis
10.3. Analysis
Comparison 10: Sensitivity analysis (adequate allocation concealment), Outcome 3: Cardiovascular death
10.4. Analysis
10.4. Analysis
Comparison 10: Sensitivity analysis (adequate allocation concealment), Outcome 4: Major bleeding
11.1. Analysis
11.1. Analysis
Comparison 11: Sensitivity analysis (low risk of attrition), Outcome 1: Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
11.2. Analysis
11.2. Analysis
Comparison 11: Sensitivity analysis (low risk of attrition), Outcome 2: Death (any cause)
11.3. Analysis
11.3. Analysis
Comparison 11: Sensitivity analysis (low risk of attrition), Outcome 3: Cardiovascular death
11.4. Analysis
11.4. Analysis
Comparison 11: Sensitivity analysis (low risk of attrition), Outcome 4: Major bleeding
12.1. Analysis
12.1. Analysis
Comparison 12: Stroke (subgroup analysis), Outcome 1: Stage of CKD
12.2. Analysis
12.2. Analysis
Comparison 12: Stroke (subgroup analysis), Outcome 2: Diabetes
12.3. Analysis
12.3. Analysis
Comparison 12: Stroke (subgroup analysis), Outcome 3: Sex
12.4. Analysis
12.4. Analysis
Comparison 12: Stroke (subgroup analysis), Outcome 4: Duration of intervention
13.1. Analysis
13.1. Analysis
Comparison 13: Minor bleeding (subgroup analysis), Outcome 1: Stage of CKD
13.2. Analysis
13.2. Analysis
Comparison 13: Minor bleeding (subgroup analysis), Outcome 2: Diabetes
13.3. Analysis
13.3. Analysis
Comparison 13: Minor bleeding (subgroup analysis), Outcome 3: Sex
13.4. Analysis
13.4. Analysis
Comparison 13: Minor bleeding (subgroup analysis), Outcome 4: Duration of intervention
14.1. Analysis
14.1. Analysis
Comparison 14: Dialysis access failure (subgroup analysis), Outcome 1: Diabetes
14.2. Analysis
14.2. Analysis
Comparison 14: Dialysis access failure (subgroup analysis), Outcome 2: Sex
14.3. Analysis
14.3. Analysis
Comparison 14: Dialysis access failure (subgroup analysis), Outcome 3: Duration of intervention
15.1. Analysis
15.1. Analysis
Comparison 15: Failure to attain suitability for dialysis (subgroup analysis), Outcome 1: Duration of intervention

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel