Critique on the Use of Early Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Minor Acute Cerebral Ischemic Events

Abstract

Background: Two recent cerebrovascular studies, Clopidogrel (Clo) in High-risk patients with Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events (CHANCE) and Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and minor ischemic stroke (POINT), have purportedly demonstrated the superiority of early dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), using aspirin (ASA) plus Clo, in comparison to ASA alone following the occurrence of acute minor cerebral infarction or transient ischemic attack. However, limitations to these trials exist that may not have been adequately explored and presented in the literature, and which may impact the overall efficacy and benefit of DAPT in these situations. Herein we provide a detailed and extensive critique of these 2 trials and of a combined analysis, with particular attention to study data and analyses pertaining to hemorrhagic complications. Summary: DAPT may be superior to ASA alone in preventing recurrent cerebral ischemic events, but exclusively during the first 7–10 days of treatment, and probably only in the presence of acute infarction on cerebral imaging. The impact of minor hemorrhages, which are often clinically consequential and which frequently lead to permanent DAPT discontinuation, has not been adequately considered in the available analyses. Based on data from the trials, DAPT use causes more major and minor hemorrhages than ASA use alone or Clo alone, and Clo use results in fewer hemorrhages than the use of ASA alone. Analyses that include hemorrhage data from the period of Clo alone use as part of the DAPT data may provide inaccurate and erroneous conclusions regarding the relative safety and overall net benefit of DAPT use over ASA alone.