Prasugrel vs. Ticagrelor for Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background The newer P2Y 12 inhibitors have better efficacy than clopidogrel. However, whether ticagrelor or prasugrel have a better comparative safety and efficacy profile, especially in the long-term, remains inconclusive. Objective We compared prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods MEDLINE and the Cochrane library were queried for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies comparing prasugrel with ticagrelor in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Random-effects pooling was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified by duration of follow-up (short term [≤ 3 months] and long term [≥ 1 year]) and study design. Results In total, 14 studies (six RCTs, eight observational studies), including 40,188 patients, met eligibility criteria. Pooled analysis did not indicate that prasugrel significantly decreased all-cause mortality compared with ticagrelor in the short term (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.20–1.20; p = 0.11) or long term (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48–1.15; p = 0.38). Pooled observational studies showed significantly lower long-term all-cause mortality (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.43–0.92; p = 0.02) and short-term stent thrombosis (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.28–0.75; p = 0.002) with prasugrel. No significant difference was observed in the risk of nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, bleeding, or repeat revascularization between the two groups. Results remained similar after stratification according to follow-up and study design. Conclusions The present analysis suggests that prasugrel might have a better efficacy profile than ticagrelor in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. However, this advantage was only seen in pooled observational studies and is likely to be affected by selection bias.