This study was conducted as a randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy of ASA alone versus the combination of ASA and rivaroxaban in alleviating the signs and symptoms of PAD in patients with controlled diabetes mellitus (DM). Sixty patients were included in the study and randomly divided into two groups, each containing thirty patients. Prior to the initiation of the treatment, baseline features of the patients in the groups were compared, demonstrating no significant difference in age, gender, BMI, and smoking status. Additionally, the patients in the two groups had similar comorbidities and were receiving similar standard medications such as statins. Moreover, the symptoms of PAD were similarly frequent in the groups, and patients had not received any prior treatment for their PAD.
After the treatment, the patients receiving the combination of rivaroxaban and ASA showed significant improvement in IC and limb pain at rest. Additionally, ABI was normalized in more patients in this group compared to those receiving ASA alone. IC has been a major concern in our study. Currently, the only FDA-approved medications for IC are pentoxifylline and cilostazol. Cilostazol is more accepted because it improves walking distance, despite its adverse effects. However, its efficacy on MACE or major adverse limb events (MALE) remains uncertain (
25-
27). High-quality evidence supports a stronger role for surgery, endovascular intervention, and exercise in the treatment of IC rather than the current medical management (
28). Many of these management strategies are not indicated in the early stages of PAD, leading to the ongoing struggle to establish a medical approach for PAD.
The beneficial role of ASA in the management of PAD is established in several studies (
29). Several studies have proposed medical strategies to aid ASA, like the addition of clopidogrel, for the treatment of DM-related macrovascular complications (
30-
32). The proposed medications proved effective; however, they were mostly accompanied by bleeding side effects. Through these investigations, rivaroxaban showed promising outcomes. Rivaroxaban is a selective direct factor Xa inhibitor that is widely prescribed for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE). It is also approved for the prevention of thrombotic events caused by atrial fibrillation (AF) (
33). Rivaroxaban, as a direct factor Xa inhibitor, causes a significantly lower bleeding tendency compared to vitamin K antagonists (
18,
19). A meta-analysis showed that rivaroxaban is superior to ASA and warfarin for PAD, regarding its lower incidence of MALEs and major bleeding (
34).
The rationale for the evaluation of rivaroxaban and other anticoagulation therapies in the treatment of IC arises from the pathophysiology of IC and PAD. Vascular atherosclerosis is a common sequel of DM leading to arterial obstruction and tissue ischemia, which accounts for the symptoms of PAD alongside inflammation, reduced microvascular flow, and impaired angiogenesis (
35). Moreover, thrombosis is a common finding in histopathologic examinations of amputated tissues (
36). This emphasized role of clot in the pathogenesis of PAD is the pivotal reason for these studies and warrants the effort to resolve it so that symptoms can be alleviated.
The combination of rivaroxaban and ASA has been compared to ASA monotherapy in a few studies. The ATLAS TIMI-51 trial evaluated the efficacy of these regimens in reducing MACE. It concluded that rivaroxaban was superior to placebo when prescribed along with ASA; however, this superiority came at the cost of a substantially increased risk of bleeding (
17). The COMPASS trial indicated a significant reduction in MACE after adding rivaroxaban at a dosage of 2.5 mg every 12 hours to ASA at a daily dosage of 100 mg. In this trial, major adverse limb events (MALE), including acute and chronic limb ischemia and amputation due to PAD, were also evaluated. They found that the combination therapy reduces MALE. However, the addition of rivaroxaban led to an increase in major bleeding events, mostly from a gastrointestinal source, but the results showed no increase in life-threatening bleeding. The overall analysis of this study, considering MACE and MALE, found a favorable benefit with the combination of rivaroxaban and ASA (
37). A sub-analysis of the COMPASS trial suggested that the estimated net clinical benefit of combination therapy is 3.2% (95% CI, 0.6% - 5.3%) (
38).
In another randomized placebo-controlled trial, the administration of rivaroxaban reduced MALEs, either with or without ASA. Similarly, they found that rivaroxaban increased the incidence of major bleedings, with no increase in fatal, life-threatening bleedings (
21). Another study reported similar results, but no difference was found between the rivaroxaban group and the placebo group in the incidence of major bleeding, assessed according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) classification (
39). Some other studies reported similar outcomes, supporting the net benefit of rivaroxaban and ASA dual therapy (
40-
46). For instance, the VOYAGER PAD trial has supported the role of rivaroxaban and ASA dual therapy in reducing the risk of acute limb ischemia (
47). The RIVAL-PAD trial showed significant improvement in post-intervention ABI with rivaroxaban and ASA compared to clopidogrel and ASA. However, it found no difference between the two regimens in baseline ABI and chronic total occlusion (
48). Another study comparing the efficacy of rivaroxaban and clopidogrel, in combination with ASA, showed the same results; rivaroxaban was superior in above-the-knee PAD. However, they had no significant difference in below-the-knee PAD, and rivaroxaban was associated with a higher bleeding incidence (
49).
Most of these studies mainly focus on MALEs and the bleeding caused by regimens. However, we decided to focus on the potency of the regimens for symptom relief, due to the lack of evidence in this area. Moreover, unlike most of the mentioned studies, our study was conducted on patients who underwent no revascularization therapy, and we aimed to evaluate the ameliorative effect of rivaroxaban early in the course of treatment and before revascularization.
Our study followed only sixty patients for 12 weeks. It is a relatively short period of follow-up and involves small groups of patients, despite possessing an efficiently calculated sample size. In order to apply our results in future clinical practice, it is crucial to examine them on a larger scale. The addition of rivaroxaban to ASA is deemed a promising treatment in diabetic patients with PAD, and its prescription may herald a novel, life-saving intervention. Thus, it is recommended that further investigations be conducted with a larger sample size and for a longer duration. Moreover, it is recommended that other variables such as mortality, need for revascularization, and rates of amputation be regarded. Our study included only diabetic patients, and we recommend further investigations including non-diabetic PAD patients.
5.1. Conclusions
Our findings suggest that the combination of rivaroxaban and ASA is more potent than ASA alone for the treatment of PAD symptoms before any surgical management. It reduced IC and leg pain at rest, and it significantly improved the ABI. Additionally, the combination of rivaroxaban and ASA did not increase the risk of bleeding compared to ASA alone. There were no major adverse limb events in our study.