Duration of triple antithrombotic therapy and outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shah R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5509930 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Duration of triple antithrombotic therapy and outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
Shah Rahman R Delgado Glenda G Finks Shannon W SW
Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy 20170601 Suppl 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and objectiveMost Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) receive only dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) without oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists [VKA] or non-VKA oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). However, it has not been fully investigated whether the DAPT results in better clinical outcomes in the early period after PCI than the standard triple therapy with VKA or NOAC.MethodsWe analyzed the claims records of 11,039 Korean AF population who had PCI between 2013 and 2018. Patients were categorized according to the post-PCI antithrombotic therapy as VKA-based triple therapy (VKA-TT), NOAC-based triple therapy (NOAC-TT), and DAPT groups. After baseline adjustment using inverse probability weighting, we compared the risks of ischemic endpoints (ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality) and major bleeding at 3 months post-PCI.ResultsIschemic stroke, MI, and all-cause mortality occurred in 105, 423, and 379 patients, respectively, and 138 patients experienced major bleeding. The DAPT group was associated with a lower risk of ischemic stroke and major bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.84) compared to the VKA-TT group, despite no significant differences in the risks of MI and all-cause mortality. In contrast, the DAPT group demonstrated no significant difference in the risks for ischemic endpoints compared to the NOAC-TT group. Additionally, the DAPT group had a numerically lower risk of major bleeding than the NOAC-TT group but this was not statistically significant (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-1.07).ConclusionsAn outcome benefit of DAPT was observed in the early period after PCI compared to the VKA-TT, but not against NOAC-TT users among the Asian AF population. Given the potential long-term benefits of NOACs, greater efforts should be made to increase compliance in clinical practice with proper combination therapy with NOAC after PCI.
| S-EPMC8880831 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OAC plus clopidogrel with or without aspirin in a real-world setting. Methods:We retrospectively analyzed data from an international, multi-center registry between 2003 and 2014 (n = 15,401). Patients with ACS and receiving OAC after PCI were screened. The composite primary endpoint was 1-year all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding. Results:The final analysis enrolled 642 patients including 62 patients (9.7%) with OAC and clopidogrel (dual therapy), and 580 patients (90.3%) with the combination of aspirin, OAC and clopidogrel (triple therapy). Patients on triple therapy were more often female and were more likely to have comorbidities. There was no significant difference regarding the primary end point between dual therapy with triple therapy patients [17.74% vs. 17.24%; unadjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.035; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.556-1.929; adjusted HR: 1.026; 95% CI: 0.544-1.937]. However, the re-infarction rate was significantly higher in dual therapy than triple therapy patients (14.52% vs. 5.34%; unadjusted HR: 2.807; 95% CI: 1.329-5.928; adjusted HR: 2.333; 95% CI: 1.078-5.047). In addition, there was no difference between two regimes in all-cause death and severe bleeding. Conclusions:In real-life patients with ACS following PCI and with an indication of OAC, triple therapy was not associated with an increased rate of adverse outcomes compared to dual therapy. Moreover, it decreased risk of re-infarction and did not increase risk of severe bleeding.
| S-EPMC5756741 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Management of patients on long-term anticoagulation requiring percutaneous coronary intervention is challenging. Triple therapy with oral anticoagulant and dual antiplatelet therapy is the standard of care. However, there is no strong evidence to support this strategy. There is emerging data regarding the safety and efficacy of dual therapy with oral anticoagulant and single antiplatelet therapy in these patients. In this comprehensive review we highlight available evidence regarding various antithrombotic regimens' efficacy and safety in patient with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with long-term anticoagulation therapy requirements.
| S-EPMC5889881 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9982210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrior randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the optimal antithrombotic therapies for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not been powered to evaluate ischemic outcomes. We compared double therapy with oral anticoagulation (OAC) and a P2Y12 inhibitor to triple therapy with an OAC + dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with AF requiring PCI.MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, we searched for RCTs including patients with AF as an indication for OAC and undergoing PCI or medical management of acute coronary syndrome. The results were pooled using fixed-effects and random-effects models to estimate the overall effect of double therapy versus triple therapy on ischemic and bleeding outcomes.ResultsWe identified four RCTs, comprising 10,238 patients (5,498 double therapy, 4,740 triple therapy). Trial-reported major adverse cardiovascular events were similar between double therapy and triple therapy (fixed effect model OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.94-1.26). However, stent thrombosis (61/5,496 double therapy vs. 33/4738 triple therapy; fixed effect model OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.02-2.40; number needed to treat with triple therapy = 242) favored triple therapy. Bleeding outcomes were less frequent with double therapy (746/5470 vs. 950/4710; fixed effect model OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.53-0.65; number needed to harm with triple therapy = 16), but with significant heterogeneity (Q = 8.33, p = .04; I2 = 64%), as were intracranial hemorrhages (19/5470 vs. 30/4710; fixed effect model OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.96).ConclusionsDouble therapy in patients with AF requiring OAC following PCI or Acute coronary syndrome has a significantly better safety profile than triple therapy but may be associated with a modest increased risk of stent thrombosis.
| S-EPMC7211549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have indications for oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. The concurrent use of all three agents, termed triple oral antithrombotic therapy (TAT), increases the risk of bleeding. A number of prospective trials showed that the omission of aspirin mitigates the risk of bleeding without affecting major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE).Materials and methodsThe databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched from inception to October 2019. Relevant randomized control trials comparing dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) versus TAT were identified and a metanalysis was performed using random-effect model. The safety endpoints of interest were thrombolysis in myocardial infarction criteria (TIMI) major and minor bleeding, TIMI major bleeding, and intracranial bleeding. The efficacy endpoints of interest were MACE and individual components of MACE.ResultsSix trials with 11,722 patients were included. For safety endpoint, DAT was associated with significantly lower incidence of TIMI major and minor bleeding [RR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.44-0.77, P = 0.0001], TIMI major bleeding [RR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.42-0.73, P < 0.0001] as well as intracranial bleeding [RR: 0.35, 95% CI 0.16-0.73, P = 0.006] compared with TAT. No significant difference was observed for MACE [RR: 0.96 (0.79-1.17) P = 0.71] or any of the individual components of MACE between the two groups.ConclusionOmission of aspirin from TAT in patients with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) after percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower risk of bleeding without compromising the efficacy in terms of mortality and cardiovascular thrombotic events.
| S-EPMC7791287 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeSelecting an ideal antithrombotic therapy for elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be challenging since they have a higher thromboembolic and bleeding risk than younger patients. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of triple therapy (TT: oral anticoagulation plus dual antiplatelet therapy: aspirin plus clopidogrel) in patients ?75 years of age with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsA prospective multicenter study was conducted from 2003 to 2012 at 6 Spanish teaching hospitals. A cohort study of consecutive patients with AF undergoing PCI and treated with TT or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was analyzed. All outcomes were evaluated at 1-year of follow-up.ResultsFive hundred and eighty-five patients, 289 (49%) of whom were ?75 years of age (79.6±3.4 years; 33% women) were identified. TT was prescribed in 55.9% of patients at discharge who had a higher thromboembolic risk (CHA2DS2VASc score: 4.23±1.51 vs 3.76±1.40, p = 0.007 and a higher bleeding risk (HAS-BLED ?3: 88.6% vs 79.2%, p = 0.02) than those on DAPT. Therefore, patients on TT had a lower rate of thromboembolism than those on DAPT (0.6% vs 6.9%, p = 0.004; HR 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70, p = 0.004). Major bleeding events occurred more frequently in patients on TT than in those on DAPT (11.7% vs 2.4%, p = 0.002; HR 5.2, 95% CI: 1.53-17.57, p = 0.008). The overall mortality rate was similar in both treatment groups (11.9% vs 13.9%, p = 0.38); however, after adjustment for confounding variables, TT was associated with a reduced mortality rate (HR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.12-0.86, p = 0.02).ConclusionsIn elderly patients with AF undergoing PCI, the use of TT compared to DAPT was associated with reduced thromboembolism and mortality rates, although a higher rate of major bleeding.
| S-EPMC4726489 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the patients on warfarin undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention included in the prospective, multicentre, observational WAR-STENT registry, age ≥75 years was associated with a significant increase in in-hospital major bleeding, length of hospitalization, and use of bare-metal stents, with no differences in the peri-procedural management and antithrombotic therapy.
| S-EPMC9243611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundsWe investigated the prognostic impact of antithrombotic regimens at 1-year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).Method and resultsA total of 13,278 AF patients who underwent PCI from 2009 to 2013 were selected from Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Patients were categorized by antithrombotic regimens at 1-year after PCI: (1) OAC with or without single antiplatelet (OAC±SAPT); (2) triple therapy (TT) and (3) antiplatelets (APT) only. After propensity score matching, composite ischaemia (death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), composite bleeding (intracranial hemorrhage and gastrointestinal bleeding), and a composite clinical outcome (composite ischaemia and bleeding) were compared. Of total population, 1,100 (8.3%), 746 (5.6%), and 11,432 (86.1%) were treated with OAC±SAPT, TT, and APT only, respectively. Compared to OAC±SAPT group, the TT group had significantly higher risk of the composite clinical outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-2.13) attributed to a higher trend in both ischaemia (HR 1.63, 95% CI 0.99-2.67) and bleeding (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.69-2.13). The APT only group showed a higher risk of ischaemia (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.25-2.74), despite a lower risk of bleeding (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.94) compared to OAC±SAPT group.ConclusionsOAC±SAPT was associated with better clinical outcomes compared to TT or APT only treatments, beyond 1-year after PCI among Asians with AF.
| S-EPMC7561121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dual antiplatelet therapy has long been the standard of care in preventing coronary and cerebrovascular thrombotic events in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but choosing the optimal treatment duration and composition has become a major challenge. Numerous studies have shown that certain patients benefit from either shortened or extended treatment duration. Furthermore, trials evaluating novel antithrombotic strategies, such as P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, low-dose factor Xa inhibitors on top of antiplatelet therapy, and platelet function- or genotype-guided (de-)escalation of treatment, have shown promising results. Current guidelines recommend risk stratification for tailoring treatment duration and composition. Although several risk stratification methods evaluating ischaemic and bleeding risk are available to clinicians, such as the use of risk scores, platelet function testing , and genotyping, risk stratification has not been broadly adopted in clinical practice. Multiple risk scores have been developed to determine the optimal treatment duration, but external validation studies have yielded conflicting results in terms of calibration and discrimination and there is limited evidence that their adoption improves clinical outcomes. Likewise, platelet function testing and genotyping can provide useful prognostic insights, but trials evaluating treatment strategies guided by these stratification methods have produced mixed results. This review critically appraises the currently available antithrombotic strategies and provides a viewpoint on the use of different risk stratification methods alongside clinical judgement in current clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8244639 | biostudies-literature