Key result
OACs linked to ~59% fewer major events vs antiplatelets in patients with stroke, AF, and atherosclerosis.
Why the study?
The optimal antithrombotic regimen for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with ischemic stroke due to both AF and atherosclerotic large-vessel stenosis remains unclear.
Does oral anticoagulant monotherapy reduce composite cardiovascular events and death in patients with ischemic stroke due to atrial fibrillation and large-artery atherosclerosis compared to antiplatelet therapy?
Cohort (n=632)
No
Does oral anticoagulant monotherapy reduce composite cardiovascular events and death in patients with ischemic stroke due to atrial fibrillation and large-artery atherosclerosis compared to antiplatelet therapy?
Effect estimate: HR 0.41 (95% CI 0.19-0.83)
Absolute Event Rate: 17.1% vs 31.4%
p-value: p=0.01
OAC monotherapy is associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events and death compared to antiplatelets in patients with ischemic stroke due to both atrial fibrillation and large-artery atherosclerosis.
Introduction The optimal antithrombotic regimen for preventing recurrent stroke in patients who experience ischemic stroke due to atrial fibrillation (AF) and atherosclerotic large-vessel stenosis remains unclear. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of multiple antithrombotic therapies on outcomes after ischemic stroke due to ≥ 2 causes. Methods Data from 632 patients at a single hospital, who experienced ischemic stroke due to AF and large-artery atherosclerosis. Patients were categorized into 3 groups according to antithrombotic therapy at discharge: antiplatelets (APT), oral anticoagulant(s) (OAC), and APT plus OAC. Study outcomes included recurrent ischemic stroke and composite outcomes for cardiovascular events, death and major bleeding. Propensity scores (PS) were used to balance APT and OAC groups. Results Among 632 patients, 158 (25.0%) were treated with APT, 447 (70.7%) with OAC, and 27 (4.3%) with both APT and OAC. After applying PS, only OAC had a significant beneficial effect on the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 0.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19–0.83]; p = 0.01) and death (HR 0.12 [95% CI 0.01–1.0]; p = 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in one-year recurrent stroke events or risk for bleeding between the APT and OAC groups. Further analysis of the relationship between the dose of OAC and outcome revealed no significant difference between reduced and standard doses of OAC. Conclusion This study demonstrated that OAC monotherapy was associated with a lower risk for composite outcomes and death after ischemic stroke due to AF and atherosclerotic stenosis, although the OAC dose had no effect on clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Acute ischemic stroke with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and large-artery atherosclerosis (n=632). Oral anticoagulants (OAC) vs. Antiplatelets (APT) was evaluated on Composite of recurrent ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, gastrointestinal bleeding, and all-cause death at 1 year (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.83, p=0.01). Oral anticoagulants reduced the 1-year risk of composite vascular events and death (HR 0.41) compared to antiplatelets in patients with ischemic stroke, atrial fibrillation, and atherosclerosis.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: