Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in real-world practice. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched systematically to obtain relevant Asian observational studies. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included six studies with 27959 participants. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was significantly beneficial in prevention of major adverse cardiac events (MACCEs) (OR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.46-0.83, I(2)=69%, p=0.001) mainly driven by reducing stroke (OR=0.62; 95% CI: 0.49-0.78, I(2)=0%, p<0.001). No differences were found between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the risk of cardiovascular mortality (OR=0.66; 95% CI: 0.41-1.06, I(2)=0%, p=0.09), target vessel revascularization (OR=0.53; 95% CI: 0.21-1.35, I(2)=82%, p=0.18), major bleeding (OR=1.11; 95% CI: 0.62-2.00, I(2)=75%, p=0.73), and net adverse clinical and cerebral events (OR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.55-1.04, I(2)=78%, p=0.09). However, ticagrelor significantly increased the incidence of major/minor (OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.36-2.21, I(2)=0%, p<0.001) and minor bleeding (OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.29-2.32, I(2)=0%, p<0.001). Sensitivity analyses did not find consistent effect of ticagrelor on prevention of all-cause death and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggested that ticagrelor might reduce the risk of MACCEs mainly by reducing stroke in Asian patients with ACS without increasing the rates of major bleeding. Ticagrelor did not show a significant effect on other parts of MACCEs. Considerable increase in the risk of major/minor and minor bleeding was observed in ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel users. Further high-quality studies are required to support these findings.