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.