Safety and efficacy of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A study-level meta-analysis from 15 studies

Background: There is poor evidence on clinical outcome of switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Objectives: Data on the topic are limited and we performed a studylevel meta-analysis to assess safety and efficacy of such strategy. Methods: A total of 15 studies and 3974 patients were included. The following comparisons were performed: prasugrel switching versus prasugrel only therapy; and prasugrel switching versus clopidogrel only therapy. Outcome measures were overall bleeding, major bleeding, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results: There was no statistically significant increased bleeding risk in the prasugrel switching versus prasugrel only group [overall bleeding: OR 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-1.66; P = 0.77; major bleeding: OR 0.69, 95% CI, 0.32-1.49; P = 0.34]; MACE rates were also comparable. Incidence of safety end points was similar in the prasugrel switching and clopidogrel only groups (overall bleeding: OR 1.27, 95% CI, 0.75-2.15; P = 0.37; major bleeding: OR 0.70, 95% CI, 0.29-1.68; P = 0.42); occurrence of MACE was 3.8% in the prasugrel switching versus 8.3% in the clopidogrel only group (P = 0.23). No statistically significant difference in the safety outcomes was present stratifying by clinical presentation. Conclusions: Switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel does not increase bleeding complications during follow-up of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention; however, the strength of the data is not sufficient to make definitive clinical recommendations.