mechanism | treatment | Demonstrated benefit and harm | k | | | |
---|
anti inflammatory drugs | pexelizumab | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
APEX-AMI, 2007 | pexelizumab vs placebo | | | All cause death 1.04 [0.80; 1.33] severe bleeding 1.01 [0.54; 1.90] Serious infection 0.90 [0.65; 1.25] | COMMA, 2003 | pexelizumab vs placebo | | | All cause death 0.42 [0.18; 1.01] | COMPLY, 2003 | pexelizumab vs placebo | | | All cause death 0.82 [0.49; 1.40] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
APEX-AMI, 2007 | pexelizumab given as a 2-mg/kg intravenous bolus prior to PCI followed by 0.05-mg/kg per hour infusion over the subsequent 24 hours (n=2860) vs. placebo (n=2885) | primary angioplasty fo high risk STEMI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2860/2885 Primary endpoint: all cause mortality FU duration: 30 days | COMMA, 2003 | pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus and 0.05-mg/kg per h infusion for 20 hours (n=328) vs. placebo (n=315) 3rd arm with pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus | patients with MI | double blind Sample size: 328/315 Primary endpoint: creatine kinase-MB area under the curve FU duration: | COMPLY, 2003 | pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus plus 0.05 mg/kg per h for 20 hours (n=315) vs. placebo (n=316) 3rd arm with pexelizumab 2.0-mg/kg bolus | patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction receiving fibrinolysis | double blind Sample size: 315/316 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
antiplatelets drug | cangrelor | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
CHAMPION-PLATFORM, 2009 | cangrelor up front vs delayed clopidogrel | | | target vessel revascularization 0.72 [0.40; 1.30] stroke 1.15 [0.39; 3.43] MI 0.91 [0.75; 1.11] death, MI, stroke, or target vessel revascularization 0.87 [0.72; 1.05] | CHAMPION-PCI, 2009 | cangrelor up front vs clopidogrel up front | | | target vessel revascularization 0.56 [0.28; 1.11] All cause death 1.59 [0.52; 4.86] MACE 0.67 [0.40; 1.14] stroke 0.85 [0.29; 2.53] MI 0.40 [0.12; 1.27] death, MI, stroke, or target vessel revascularization 1.04 [0.89; 1.22] | CHAMPION PHOENIX, 2013 | cangrelor vs clopidogrel | MACE 0.80 [0.68; 0.94] MI 0.81 [0.68; 0.97] death, MI, stroke, or target vessel revascularization 0.80 [0.68; 0.94] net benefit 0.80 [0.68; 0.94] stent thrombosis 0.62 [0.43; 0.90] | | all bleeding 1.75 [0.73; 4.17] All cause death 1.00 [0.52; 1.92] Cardiovascular mortality 1.00 [0.52; 1.92] major bleeding 1.50 [0.53; 4.21] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
CHAMPION-PLATFORM, 2009 | cangrelor up front (cangrelor during PCI followed by 600 mg of clopidogrel) (n=2693) vs. delayed clopidogrel (placebo during PCI followed by 600 mg of clopidogrel) (n=2669) cangrelor up front vs delayed clopidogrel | patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Patients with stable angina were initially eligible
at the beginning of the trial before a protocol
amendment | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2693/2669 Primary endpoint: death, MI, ischemia-driven revascularization FU duration: 48 h | CHAMPION-PCI, 2009 | cangrelor up front (cangrelor administered before percutaneous coronary intervention and followed by clopidogrel) (n=4367) vs. clopidogrel up front (clopidogrel followed by placebo) (n=4355) cangrelor then clopidogrel vs clopidogrel then placebo | high risk patients requiring PCI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 4367/4355 Primary endpoint: death, MI, ischemia-driven revascularization FU duration: 48 h | CHAMPION PHOENIX, 2013 | bolus and infusion of cangrelor followed by 600mg clopidogrel immediately post-infusion (n=5472) vs. loading dose of 600 mg or 300 mg of clopidogrel (n=5470) | patients undergoing PCI for stable angina or for acute coronary syndromes, including ST-elevation MI | double-blind Parallel groups Sample size: 5472/5470 Primary endpoint: all-cause mortality, MI, ischemia-driven revascularization and stent thrombosis FU duration: 48 hours |
|
antiplatelets drug | elinogrel | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
INNOVATE PCI | elinogrel vs clopidogrel | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
INNOVATE PCI | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
antiplatelets drug | prasugrel | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
TRITOM TIMI 38 (PCI subgroup), 2009 | prasugrel vs clopidogrel | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
TRITOM TIMI 38 (PCI subgroup), 2009 | prasugrel (60 mg loading, 10 mg maintenance) (n=1769) vs. clopidogrel (300 mg loading, 75 mg maintenance) (n=1765) | subgroup of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction | Sample size: 1769/1765 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
antithrombotics | aspirin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Taylor (Perth), 1991 | aspirin vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Non fatal MI 0.00 [0.00; NaN] vascular events 0.00 [0.00; NaN] | M-HEART II (aspirin), 1995 | aspirin vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI 0.51 [0.18; 1.49] vascular deaths 1.03 [0.06; 16.36] Non fatal MI 0.51 [0.18; 1.49] vascular events 0.56 [0.21; 1.50] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Taylor (Perth), 1991 | aspirin, 100 mg/day after 2 weeks (n=124) vs. placebo (n=128) | patients aged less than 70 years without acute infarction undergoing PTCA | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 124/128 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6m | M-HEART II (aspirin), 1995 | aspirin 325 mg daily (n=497) vs. placebo (n=510) | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 497/510 Primary endpoint: clinical failure at 6 months after successful PTCA FU duration: 6m |
|
antithrombotics | bivalirudin | versus heparin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ISAR-REACT 3, 2008 | bivalirudin vs UFH | | | | REPLACE-1, 2004 | bivalirudin vs UFH | | | death, MI, urgent TVR, in-hospital major bleeding 0.77 [0.35; 1.69] All cause death 0.00 [0.00; NaN] MI 0.95 [0.56; 1.60] death, MI, revascularization 0.82 [0.51; 1.31] Unplanned revascularisation for ischaemia 0.56 [0.17; 1.91] | BAT (Bittl), 1995 | bivalirudin vs UFH | major bleeding 0.39 [0.30; 0.50] | | All cause death 2.23 [0.69; 7.22] Ischaemic complication 0.93 [0.79; 1.10] MI 0.80 [0.58; 1.11] Unplanned revascularisation for ischaemia 0.99 [0.62; 1.58] | ARMYDA BIVALVE | bivalirudin vs UFH | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ISAR-REACT 3, 2008 | UFH bolus of 140 U/kg (n=2289) vs. bivalirudin (bolus of 0.75 mg/kg, followed by infusion of 1.75 mg/kg/hr) (n=2281) | troponin-negative patients undergoing PCI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2289/2281 Primary endpoint: death, MI, urgent TVR, in-hospital major bleeding, FU duration: 30 days (mean) | REPLACE-1, 2004 | bivalirudin (0.75 mg/kg bolus, 1.75 mg/kg/h infusion during the procedure (n=532) vs. heparin (70 U/kg initial bolus) adjusted to ACT of 200 to 300s (n=524) | patients undergoing elective or urgent revascularization | Parallel groups Sample size: 532/524 Primary endpoint: death, MI, repeat revascularization FU duration: hospital stay (48h min) | BAT (Bittl), 1995 | bivalirudin immediately before angioplasty. (n=2059) vs. heparin immediately before angioplasty (n=2039) | patients undergoing urgent angioplasty for unstable or postinfarction angina | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2059/2039 Primary endpoint: death, MI, abrupt clossure, rapide deterioration FU duration: hospital stay Although two parallel studies were
specified to meet regulatory requirements, the protocol specified that scientific analysis and safety monitoring would
involve the combined cohort of 4000 patients | ARMYDA BIVALVE | bivalirudin (0.75 mg/kg bolus followed by 1.75 mg/kg per hour during the procedure) (n=140) vs. unfractionated heparin (75 IU/kg) (n=0) | patients at high bleeding risk (over 75 years of age, diabetes, reduced renal function) scheduled for PCI | Parallel groups Sample size: 140/0 Primary endpoint: death, MI, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis FU duration: |
|
antithrombotics | bivalirudin | versus heparin + anti Gp2b3a No demonstrated result for efficacy | 5 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
REPLACE-2, 2003 | bivalirudin vs heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | | | | HORIZONS-AMI (Stone), 2008 | bivalirudin vs heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | All cause death 0.66 [0.44; 1.00] safety criteria 0.60 [0.46; 0.77] major bleeding 0.61 [0.44; 0.84] minor bleeding 0.62 [0.44; 0.88] net benefit 0.76 [0.63; 0.92] | | Ischaemic complication 0.99 [0.76; 1.30] MI 1.14 [0.64; 2.01] death, MI, revascularization 0.99 [0.76; 1.30] Unplanned revascularisation for ischaemia 1.34 [0.87; 2.07] | ACUITY (Stone) (bivalirudin alone), 2006 | bivalirudin vs heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | | | | Kleiman, 2002 | bivalirudin + eptifibatide vs heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | | | | NAPLES (Tavano), 2009 | bivalirudin vs UFH plus tirofiban | death, MI, urgent TVR, in-hospital major bleeding 0.57 [0.38; 0.84] minor bleeding 0.42 [0.23; 0.78] | | All cause death NaN [NaN; NaN] major bleeding 0.25 [0.03; 2.23] Unplanned revascularisation for ischaemia NaN [NaN; NaN] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
REPLACE-2, 2003 | bivalirudin, with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (Gp IIb/IIIa) inhibition on a provisional basis for complications during PCI (n=2994) vs. heparin plus planned Gp IIb/IIIa blockade (n=3008) | patients undergoing urgent or elective PCI | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 2994/3008 Primary endpoint: death, MI, urgent revascularization, or in-hospital FU duration: 30 days | HORIZONS-AMI (Stone), 2008 | Bivalirudin (n=1800) vs. Heparin plus GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor (n=1802) | patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
who presented within 12 hours after the onset of symptoms and who were
undergoing primary PCI | open Parallel groups Sample size: 1800/1802 Primary endpoint: MACE, major bleeding FU duration: 30 days | ACUITY (Stone) (bivalirudin alone), 2006 | bivalirudin alone (n=9216) vs. unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (n=4603) | patients with acute coronary syndromes | open Parallel groups Sample size: 9216/4603 Primary endpoint: ischemia events and bleeding FU duration: 30 days | Kleiman, 2002 | bivalirudin + eptifibatide (n=-9) vs. heparin + eptifibatide (n=-9) | patients who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention | open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: none defined FU duration: | NAPLES (Tavano), 2009 | bivalirudin monotherapy (n=167) vs. unfractionated heparin plus tirofiban (n=168) | patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention | open Parallel groups Sample size: 167/168 Primary endpoint: MACE FU duration: 30 days |
|
antithrombotics | dalteparin | versus heparin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Natarajan (without antiGp2b3a), 2003 | dalteparin vs UFH | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Natarajan (without antiGp2b3a), 2003 | Dalteparin 100 IU/kg bolus (n=-9) vs. UFH 100 IU/kg bolus (n=-9) | Elective or urgent PCI | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
antithrombotics | dalteparin | versus heparin + anti Gp2b3a No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Natarajan (+ antiGp2b3a), 2003 | dalteparin vs UFH + anti Gp2b3a | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Natarajan (+ antiGp2b3a), 2003 | Dalteparin 70 IU/kg bolus + GP IIb/IIIa inhibitorse/p (n=-9) vs. UFH 70 IU/kg bolus +GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors (n=-9) | | Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|
antithrombotics | dipyridamol | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Schwartz (Toronto), 1988 | aspirin + dipyridamol vs placebo | Non fatal MI 0.28 [0.13; 0.64] Non fatal MI 0.28 [0.13; 0.64] vascular events 0.28 [0.13; 0.64] | | vascular deaths NaN [NaN; NaN] Non fatal stroke NaN [NaN; NaN] non vascular death NaN [NaN; NaN] | White (aspirin+dipiridamol), 1991 | aspirin + dipyridamol vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI 1.45 [0.66; 3.21] vascular deaths 2.07 [0.19; 22.72] Non fatal stroke 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Non fatal MI 1.45 [0.66; 3.21] vascular events 1.38 [0.67; 2.86] non vascular death NaN [NaN; NaN] | Nye (Dunedin), 1990 | aspirin + dipyridamol vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI NaN [NaN; NaN] vascular deaths NaN [NaN; NaN] Non fatal stroke NaN [NaN; NaN] Non fatal MI NaN [NaN; NaN] vascular events NaN [NaN; NaN] non vascular death NaN [NaN; NaN] | Mayo-PTCA, 1989 | aspirin + dipyridamol vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI 1.54 [0.26; 9.05] vascular deaths NaN [NaN; NaN] Non fatal MI 1.54 [0.26; 9.05] vascular events 1.54 [0.26; 9.05] non vascular death NaN [NaN; NaN] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Schwartz (Toronto), 1988 | aspirin 990 + D225 (H) (n=187) vs. placebo (n=189) | | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 187/189 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6m | White (aspirin+dipiridamol), 1991 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 (n=245) vs. (n=254) | | Parallel groups Sample size: 245/254 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6m | Nye (Dunedin), 1990 | aspirin 300 + D225 (n=35) vs. placebo (n=37) | | NA Parallel groups Sample size: 35/37 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12m | Mayo-PTCA, 1989 | aspirin 975 + D225 (n=102) vs. (n=105) | | Parallel groups Sample size: 102/105 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 48h |
|
antithrombotics | enoxaparin | versus heparin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 9 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
STEEPLE, 2006 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | | Rabah, 1999 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | safety criteria 1.00 [0.07; 15.26] Ischaemic complication 1.00 [0.22; 4.56] | CRUISE, 2003 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | safety criteria 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Ischaemic complication 1.13 [0.50; 2.56] | Galeote, 2001 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | safety criteria 0.25 [0.03; 2.12] Ischaemic complication 1.63 [0.41; 6.47] | Dudek, 2000 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | safety criteria NaN [NaN; NaN] Ischaemic complication 1.25 [0.50; 3.10] | Dudek b (enox alone), 2000 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | | Drozd, 2001 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | safety criteria NaN [NaN; NaN] Ischaemic complication 1.00 [0.21; 4.72] | Dubek b (+abciximal), 2001 | enoxaparin+abciximab vs UFH | | | | ATOLL, 2010 | enoxaparin vs UFH | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
STEEPLE, 2006 | enoxaparin (0.5 or 0.75 mg per kilogram of body weight) (n=-9) vs. unfractionated heparin (adjusted for activated clotting time) (n=-9) | elective percutaneous coronary intervention. | open Parallel groups Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: major or minor bleeding FU duration: | Rabah, 1999 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus (n=30) vs. UFH 10,000 IU bolus, then titrated to ACT > 300 (n=30) | PCI for stable angina | open Parallel groups Sample size: 30/30 Primary endpoint: none defined FU duration: | CRUISE, 2003 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus (n=129) vs. UFH 60 IU/kg bolus, then titrated to ACT > 200 (n=132) | Urgent or elective PCI | open Parallel groups Sample size: 129/132 Primary endpoint: hemoglobin FU duration: 2,7 +30 days | Galeote, 2001 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus (n=50) vs. UFH 70 U/kg bolus, then titrated to ACT > 200 (n=49) | PTCA patients with stable/unstable angina or AMI | Sample size: 50/49 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Dudek, 2000 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus (n=200) vs. UFH titrated to ACT > 300 (n=200) | PCI | Sample size: 200/200 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3à days | Dudek b (enox alone), 2000 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus (n=-9) vs. UFH titrated to ACT > 300 (n=50) | PTCA complex lesionsCI | Sample size: -9/50 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Drozd, 2001 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus (n=50) vs. UFH 100 IU/kg bolus (n=50) | PCI for stable angina | Sample size: 50/50 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 24hrs, 30 days | Dubek b (+abciximal), 2001 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus + abciximab (n=-9) vs. UFH titrated to ACT > 300 (n=50) | | Sample size: -9/50 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | ATOLL, 2010 | IV enoxaparin (n=450) vs. UFH (n=460) | patients undergoing PCI for acute STEMI | open Parallel groups Sample size: 450/460 Primary endpoint: Death, Complication of MI, Procedure Failure or Major Bleeding FU duration: 30 days |
|
antithrombotics | prasugrel | versus clopidogrel No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
JUMBO-TIMI 26, 2005 | prasugrel vs clopidogrel | | | cardiovascular death, MI, stroke 0.78 [0.47; 1.31] All cause death ∞ [NaN; ∞] Non–CABG-related TIMI major bleeding 0.59 [0.10; 3.49] Major or minor TIMI bleeding 1.43 [0.40; 5.09] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
JUMBO-TIMI 26, 2005 | Prasugrel 3 doses (n=650) vs. clopidogrel 300mg loading dose
followed by 75 mg daily) (n=254) | patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 650/254 Primary endpoint: non–CABG-related bleeding FU duration: 30 days phase 2 |
|
antithrombotics | reviparin | versus heparin No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
REDUCE, 1996 | reviparin vs UFH | Ischaemic complication 0.48 [0.25; 0.94] | | safety criteria 0.88 [0.32; 2.38] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
REDUCE, 1996 | Reviparin 7,000 IU anti-Xa (n=306) vs. UFH 10,000 IU bolus (n=306) | PTCA with stable/unstable angina | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 306/306 Primary endpoint: MACE FU duration: 3 days |
|
antithrombotics | sulotroban | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
| sulotroban vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
M-HEART II (sulotroban), 1995 | (n=752) vs. placebo (n=0) | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 752/0 Primary endpoint: clinical failure at 6 months after successful PTCA FU duration: 6 months |
|
antithrombotics | ticlopidine | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
TACT, 1990 | ticlopidine vs placebo | | | Non fatal MI 0.49 [0.17; 1.40] vascular deaths ∞ [NaN; ∞] Non fatal stroke 0.98 [0.06; 15.50] Non fatal MI 0.49 [0.17; 1.40] vascular events 0.62 [0.25; 1.57] non vascular death NaN [NaN; NaN] | | ticlopidine vs placebo | | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
TACT, 1990 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 (n=177) vs. (n=173) | | Parallel groups Sample size: 177/173 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6m | White (ticlopidine), 1991 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 (n=-9) vs. placebo (n=254)
|
| Parallel groups Sample size: -9/254 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6m
|
|
restenosis prevention | amlodipine | versus control or placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Jorgensen (NICOLE), 2001 | amlodipine vs placebo | re-PTCA 0.48 [0.23; 0.99] | | restenosis 0.99 [0.73; 1.33] death 0.50 [0.05; 5.47] AMI 0.72 [0.30; 1.78] CABG 0.78 [0.39; 1.53] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Jorgensen (NICOLE), 2001 | amlodipine (10 mg/day) (n=236) vs. placebo (n=215) | | double blind Sample size: 236/215 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 4months |
|
restenosis prevention | diltiazem | versus control or placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 3 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Corcos, 1985 | diltiazem vs control | | | restenosis 0.70 [0.29; 1.68] | O’Keefe, 1991 | diltiazem vs placebo | | | restenosis 1.01 [0.63; 1.64] | Unverdorben, 1996 | diltiazem vs placebo | restenosis 0.56 [0.34; 0.91] | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Corcos, 1985 | diltiazem (90 mg tid) (n=46) vs. (n=46) | | open Sample size: 46/46 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 3 months | O’Keefe, 1991 | diltiazem (240-360 mg/day) (n=61) vs. placebo (n=59) | | double blind Sample size: 61/59 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 months | Unverdorben, 1996 | diltiazem (180 mg/day) (n=84) vs. placebo (n=86) | | double blind Sample size: 84/86 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 4 months |
|
restenosis prevention | nifedipine | versus control or placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Whitworth, 1986 | nifedipine vs placebo | | | restenosis 0.95 [0.61; 1.47] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Whitworth, 1986 | nifedipine (10 mg qid) (n=100) vs. placebo (n=98) | | double blind Sample size: 100/98 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
restenosis prevention | nisoldipine | versus control or placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Dens (CAPARES), 2000 | nisoldipine vs placebo | CABG 0.08 [0.01; 0.64] | | restenosis 0.89 [0.77; 1.03] death 2.19 [0.20; 24.09] AMI 0.44 [0.09; 2.25] re-PTCA 0.82 [0.65; 1.03] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Dens (CAPARES), 2000 | nisoldipine (40 mg/day) (n=308) vs. placebo (n=338) | | double blind Sample size: 308/338 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
restenosis prevention | verapamil | versus control or placebo No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
Hoberg, 1994 | verapamil vs placebo | | | restenosis 0.77 [0.59; 1.01] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
Hoberg, 1994 | verapamil (240 mg bid) (n=89) vs. placebo (n=83) | | double blind Sample size: 89/83 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 6 months |
|
statins | atorvastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 4 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
GAIN, 2001 | atorvastatin vs usual care | | | All-cause mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Cardiovascular mortality NaN [NaN; NaN] Revascularization 0.44 [0.20; 1.01] Nonfatal MI 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Stroke ∞ [NaN; ∞] | ARMYDA, 2004 | atorvastatin vs placebo | Nonfatal MI 0.29 [0.10; 0.84] Stroke 0.29 [0.10; 0.84] | | | NAPLES II (Briguori), 2009 | atorvastatin vs control | MI (CK-MB >3x ULN at 6 and 12 hours after PCI) 0.56 [0.40; 0.79] MI (troponin I >3x ULN at 6 and 12 hours after PCI) 0.56 [0.35; 0.91] | | | ARMYDA-RECAPTURE, 2009 | atorvastatin reload vs placebo | MACE 0.39 [0.16; 0.91] Nonfatal MI 0.41 [0.17; 0.97] | | All-cause mortality 0.00 [0.00; NaN] Revascularization 0.00 [0.00; NaN] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
GAIN, 2001 | Atorvastatin 20–40 mg/d 1 d after PCI (n=65) vs. usual care (n=66) | | open Sample size: 65/66 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 12 mo | ARMYDA, 2004 | atorvastatin 40 mg/day seven days prior to the procedure (n=76) vs. placebo (n=77) | Patients scheduled for elective PCI | double blind Sample size: 76/77 Primary endpoint: FU duration: 1 mo | NAPLES II (Briguori), 2009 | atorvastatin 80 mg loading dose administered within 24 hours prior to elective PCI (n=338) vs. no statin therapy (n=330) | Patients with coronary artery disease scheduled for elective PCI and not on statin therapy | open Parallel groups Sample size: 338/330 Primary endpoint: periprocedural MI by cardiac enzyme FU duration: 24h | ARMYDA-RECAPTURE, 2009 | atorvastatin reload (80 mg 12 h before intervention, with a further 40-mg pre-procedural dose) (n=229) vs. placebo (n=228) | patient with long-term atorvastatin treatment thereafter (40 mg/day) undergoing PCI (for stable angina or NSTEMI ACS) | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 229/228 Primary endpoint: MACE FU duration: 30 days |
|
statins | fluvastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
FLARE, 1999 | fluvastatin vs placebo | | | All-cause mortality 0.45 [0.12; 1.71] Revascularization 1.09 [0.83; 1.43] Nonfatal MI 0.31 [0.09; 1.12] | LIPS, 2002 | fluvastatin vs placebo | | | All-cause mortality 0.73 [0.48; 1.10] Cardiovascular mortality 0.53 [0.27; 1.04] Revascularization 0.85 [0.71; 1.03] Nonfatal MI 0.78 [0.49; 1.25] Stroke 1.97 [0.18; 21.73] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
FLARE, 1999 | Fluvastatin 40 mg twice daily 15–30 d before PCI (n=409) vs. placebo (n=425) | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Sample size: 409/425 Primary endpoint: angiographic restenosis FU duration: 10 mo | LIPS, 2002 | Fluvastatin 40 mg twice daily 0–22 d after PCI (n=844) vs. placebo (n=833) | patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia and successful completion of their first PCI | double blind Sample size: 844/833 Primary endpoint: MACE FU duration: 45 mo (median) |
|
statins | pravastatin | versus placebo or control No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
PREDICT, 1997 | pravastatin vs placebo | | | All-cause mortality 4.01 [0.45; 35.71] Cardiovascular mortality ∞ [NaN; ∞] Revascularization 0.88 [0.66; 1.19] Nonfatal MI 1.00 [0.25; 3.98] Stroke ∞ [NaN; ∞] |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
PREDICT, 1997 | Pravastatin 40 mg/d 1 d after PCI (n=347) vs. placebo (n=348) | patient undergoing PCI | double blind Sample size: 347/348 Primary endpoint: minimal lumen diameter FU duration: 6 mo |
|