Open Access

Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and elevates cardiac function compared with ticagrelor alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta‑analysis

  • Authors:
    • Jinling Sun
    • Xiaodong Jin
    • Limei Zhang
    • Hongshuai Shen
    • Hui Yu
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: September 25, 2023     https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12224
  • Article Number: 525
  • Copyright: © Sun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Several previous studies have reported that rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor is superior to ticagrelor monotherapy in patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); several others, however, dispute this. The present meta‑analysis summarized relevant studies, aiming to comprehensively explore the efficacy of rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor vs. ticagrelor monotherapy in patients receiving PCI. Published studies comparing the efficacy between rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor and ticagrelor alone among patients receiving PCI were searched in the CNKI, Wanfang, CQVIP, EMBASE, Cochrane and PubMed databases until January 2023. The present meta‑analysis included 3 cohort studies and 4 randomized controlled trials with 426 patients receiving rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor and 424 patients receiving ticagrelor monotherapy. Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreased the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) compared with ticagrelor [relative risk (RR), 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.18‑0.47]. Subgroup analysis revealed similar findings in studies with a follow‑up of <6 months (RR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.13‑0.47) and ≥6 months (RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18‑0.70), as well as in studies using 10 mg rosuvastatin (RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.15‑0.50) and 20 mg rosuvastatin (RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16‑0.69). In addition, rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreased the left ventricular (LV) end‑systolic diameter [mean difference (MD), ‑0.71; 95% CI, ‑(1.36‑0.07)], LV end‑diastolic diameter [MD, ‑1.17; 95% CI, ‑(1.91‑0.43)] and N‑terminal pro‑B‑type natriuretic peptide [MD, ‑2.97; 95% CI, ‑(4.55‑1.38)], and increased the LV ejection fraction (MD, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.74‑1.25). In conclusion, rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor was shown to decrease the risk of MACE and elevate cardiac function compared with ticagrelor monotherapy in patients receiving PCI.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

November-2023
Volume 26 Issue 5

Print ISSN: 1792-0981
Online ISSN:1792-1015

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Sun J, Jin X, Zhang L, Shen H and Yu H: Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and elevates cardiac function compared with ticagrelor alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta‑analysis. Exp Ther Med 26: 525, 2023
APA
Sun, J., Jin, X., Zhang, L., Shen, H., & Yu, H. (2023). Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and elevates cardiac function compared with ticagrelor alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta‑analysis. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 26, 525. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12224
MLA
Sun, J., Jin, X., Zhang, L., Shen, H., Yu, H."Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and elevates cardiac function compared with ticagrelor alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta‑analysis". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26.5 (2023): 525.
Chicago
Sun, J., Jin, X., Zhang, L., Shen, H., Yu, H."Rosuvastatin plus ticagrelor decreases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and elevates cardiac function compared with ticagrelor alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta‑analysis". Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine 26, no. 5 (2023): 525. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12224