Genotype-guided antiplatelet treatment versus conventional therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

6Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aim: This meta-analysis was carried out to explore if a personalized antiplatelet strategy based on genotyping is superior to conventional therapy. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of each database to 5 May 2020. Studies reporting endpoints in genotype-guided treatment group and conventional treatment group were included. The endpoint results were presented as the risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 10 561 patients from 16 studies (eight randomized controlled trials [RCT] and eight cohort studies) were included in the meta-analysis. The rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction (MI) were significantly lower in the genotype-guided group than in the conventional treatment group (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.73, P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, H., Xiang, Q., Liu, Z., Mu, G., Xie, Q., Zhou, S., … Cui, Y. (2021, May 1). Genotype-guided antiplatelet treatment versus conventional therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14637

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free