Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Coronary Artery Disease.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sharma R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7584687 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) combining aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor has been consistently shown to reduce recurrent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) compared with aspirin monotherapy, but at the expense of an increased risk of major bleeding. Nevertheless, the optimal duration of DAPT for secondary prevention of CAD remains uncertain, owing to the conflicting results of several large randomised trials. Among patients with stable CAD undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES), shorter durations of DAPT (3-6 months) were shown non-inferior to 12 or 24 months duration with respect to MACE, but reduced the rates of major bleeding. Contrariwise, prolonged DAPT durations (18-48 months) reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis, but at a cost of an increased risk of major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Until more evidence becomes available, the choice of optimal DAPT regimen and duration for patients with CAD requires a tailored approach based on the patient clinical presentation, baseline risk profile and management strategy. Future studies are however needed to identify patients who may derive benefit from shortened or extended DAPT courses for secondary prevention of CAD based on their individual ischaemic and bleeding risk. Based on limited evidence, 12 months duration of DAPT is currently recommended in patients with ACS irrespective of their management strategy, but large ongoing randomised trials are currently assessing the efficacy and safety of a short-term DAPT strategy (3-6 months) for patients with ACS undergoing PCI with newer generation DES. Finally, several ongoing, large-scale, randomised trials are challenging the current concept of DAPT by investigating P2Y12 receptor inhibitors as single antiplatelet therapy and may potentially shift the paradigm of antiplatelet therapy after PCI in the near future. This article provides a contemporary state-of-the-art review of the current evidence on DAPT for secondary prevention of patients with CAD and its future perspectives.
| S-EPMC5652612 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5978740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This nationwide retrospective cohort study used the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan to compare the impact of bleeding on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) versus chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). Between July 2007 and December 2010, patients with AMI (n = 15,391) and CCS (n = 19,724) who received dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting were identified from the database. AMI was associated with increased risks of MI (AMI vs. CCS: 0.38 vs. 0.16 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01), all-cause death (0.49 vs. 0.32 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01), and BARC type 3 bleeding (0.22 vs. 0.13 per 100 patient-months; p < 0.01) at 1 year compared with CCS, while the risk of BARC type 2 bleeding was marginally higher in the CCS patients than in the AMI patients (1.32 vs. 1.4 per 100 person-months; p = 0.06). Bleeding was an independent predictor of MI, stroke, and all-cause death in this East Asian population, regardless of the initial presentation. Among the patients with bleeding, AMI was associated with a higher risk of ischemic events at 1 year after bleeding compared with CCS (MI: 0.34 vs. 0.25 per 100 patient-months; p = 0.06; ischemic stroke: 0.22 vs. 0.13 per 100 patient-months; p = 0.02). The 1-year mortality after bleeding was comparable between the two groups after propensity score weighting. In conclusion, bleeding conferred an increased risk of adverse outcomes in East Asian patients with AMI and CCS.
| S-EPMC7721794 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in the form of aspirin plus a P2 Y12 inhibitor, when indicated, is one of the key treatments in coronary artery disease (CAD). Many recommendations on DAPT in patients with CAD based on current guidelines are largely inconsistent. In our current study, we aimed at systematically reviewing DAPT-relevant clinical practice guidelines, and highlighting their commonalities and differences for better informed decision-making.MethodsContemporary guidelines in English were searched in MEDLINE, Embase and websites of guideline organizations and professional societies. Guidelines with recommendations on DAPT for CAD patients were included. Guideline quality was appraised with the 6-domain Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. The reporting of conflicts of interest (COI) was assessed individually with supplementary items from the RIGHT (Reporting Item for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) checklist. Meanwhile, extraction of recommendations was performed.ResultsA total of 18 guidelines fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Most of them were graded with relatively good scores averaging from 42% to 74%. Domains for lower scores were in "stakeholder involvement" and "application." The reporting of COI was satisfactory. For the recommendations on DAPT, most guidelines with high AGREE II scores included consistent recommendations on the timing and P2 Y12 inhibitor selection. Nonetheless, conflicts still exist on the duration of DAPT.ConclusionsQuality of guidelines for DAPT in CAD was relatively high, though defects existed in "Applicability" and "Stakeholder Involvement." As these guidelines developed, DAPT recommendations gradually converged on a consensus. Clinical decision should be made on an individual basis.
| S-EPMC6906997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this post hoc analysis was to analyze real-world dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimens following polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (PF-SES) implantations in an unselected patient population.MethodsPatient-level data from two all-comers observational studies (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02629575 and NCT02905214) were pooled and analyzed in terms of their primary endpoint. During the data verification process, we observed substantial deviations from DAPT guideline recommendations. To illuminate this gap between clinical practice and guideline recommendations, we conducted a post hoc analysis of DAPT regimens and clinical event rates for which we defined the net adverse event rate (NACE) consisting of target lesion revascularization (TLR, primary endpoint of all-comers observational studies) all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and bleeding events. A logistic regression was utilized to determine predictors why ticagrelor was used in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients instead of the guideline-recommended clopidogrel.ResultsFor stable CAD, the composite endpoint of clinical, bleeding, and stent thrombosis, i.e., NACE, between the clopidogrel and ticagrelor treatment groups was not different (5.4% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.745). Likewise, in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cohort, the NACE rates were not different between both DAPT strategies (9.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.927). There were also no differences in the accumulated rates for TLR, myocardial infarction ([MI], mortality, bleeding events, and stent thrombosis in elective and ACS patients. The main predictors for ticagrelor use in stable CAD patients were age < 65 years, smaller vessels, treatment of ostial and calcified lesions, and in-stent restenosis.ConclusionWithin the framework of a post hoc analysis based on a real-world, large cohort study, there were no differences in the combined endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), bleeding and thrombotic events for clopidogrel and ticagrelor in stable CAD or ACS patients. Despite the recommendation for clopidogrel by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), real-world ticagrelor use was observed in subgroups of stable CAD patients that ought to be explored in future trials.
| S-EPMC8626401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background-Coronary endarterectomy (CEA) has been introduced to allow revascularization in end-stage coronary artery disease (CAD). After CEA, the injured remnants of the vessel's media could result in fast neo intimal tissue ingrowth, which require an anti-proliferation agent (antiplatelet therapy (APT). We aimed to review outcomes of patients undergoing CEA within bypass surgery who received either single-APT (SAPT) or dual-APT (DAPT). Methods-We retrospectively evaluated 353 consecutive patients undergoing CEA within isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the period 01/2000-07/2019. After surgery, patients received either SAPT (n = 153), or DAPT (n = 200) for six months then lifelong SAPT. Endpoints included early, late survival, and freedom from major-adverse-cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), which were defined as incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction, need for coronary intervention (PCI or CABG) or death for any cause. Results-Patients' mean age was 67 ± 9.3 years; they were predominantly male 88.1%. Both DAPT- and SAPT-groups had the same extent of CAD (mean SYNTAX-Score-II: 34.1 ± 11.6 vs. 34.4 ± 17.2, p = 0.91). Postoperatively, no difference between DAPT- and SAPT-groups was reported in the incidence of low-cardiac-output syndrome (5% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.16), revision for bleeding (5% vs. 6.5% p = 0.64), 30-day mortality (4.5% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.8) or MACCE (7.5% vs. 11.8%, p = 0.19). Imaging follow-up reported significantly higher CEA and total grafts patency (90% vs. 81.5% and 95% vs. 81%, p = 0.017) in DAPT patients. Late outcomes within 97.4 ± 67.4 months show lower incidence of overall mortality (19 vs. 51%, p < 0.001) and MACCE (24.5 vs. 58.2%, p < 0.001) in the DAPT patients when compared with SAPT patients. Conclusions-Coronary endarterectomy allows revascularization in end-stage CAD when the myocardium is still viable. The use of dual APT after CEA for at least six months seems to improve mid-to-long-term patency rates and survival, and reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events.
| S-EPMC10051999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is inconsistency in the literature regarding the clinical effects of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) when added to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in subjects with coronary artery disease (CAD). We performed meta-analysis stratified by study design to explore these differences.Methods and results39 studies [4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 35 observational studies) were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Inception-January 2018). In 221,204 patients (PPI = 77,731 patients, no PPI =143,473 patients), RCTs restricted analysis showed that PPI did not increase the risk of all-cause mortality (Risk Ratio (RR): 1.35, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.56-3.23, P = 0.50, I2 = 0), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI, 0.25-3.54, P = 0.92, I2 = 56), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR: 0.97, 95% CI, 0.62-1.51, P = 0.88, I2 = 0) or stroke (RR: 1.11, 95% CI, 0.25-5.04, P = 0.89, I2 = 26). However, PPI significantly reduced the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR: 0.32, 95% CI, 0.20-0.52, P < 0.001, I2 = 0). Conversely, analysis of observational studies showed that PPI significantly increased the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.11-1.41, P < 0.001, I2 = 82), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 1.25, 95% CI, 1.03-1.52, P = 0.02, I2 = 71), MI (RR: 1.30, 95% CI, 1.16-1.47, P < 0.001, I2 = 82) and stroke (RR: 1.60, 95% CI, 1.43-1.78, P < 0.001, I2 = 0), without reducing GI bleeding (RR: 0.74, 95% CI, 0.45-1.22, P = 0.24, I2 = 79).ConclusionMeta-analysis of RCTs endorsed the use of PPI with DAPT for reducing GI bleeding without worsening cardiovascular outcomes. These findings oppose the negative observational data regarding effects of PPI with DAPT.
| S-EPMC7489463 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended over single antiplatelet
| S-EPMC9478706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Observational studies evaluating the possible interaction between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel have shown mixed results. We conducted a systematic review comparing the safety of individual PPIs in patients with coronary artery disease taking clopidogrel.Studies performed from January 1995 to December 2013 were screened for inclusion. Data were extracted, and study quality was graded for 34 potential studies. For those studies in which follow-up period, outcomes, and multivariable adjustment were comparable, meta-analysis was performed.The adjusted odds or hazard ratios for the composite of cardiovascular or all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 1 year were reported in 6 observational studies with data on individual PPIs. Random-effects meta-analyses of the 6 studies revealed an increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events for those taking pantoprazole (hazard ratio 1.38; 95% CI 1.12-1.70), lansoprazole (hazard ratio 1.29; 95% CI 1.09-1.52), or esomeprazole (hazard ratio 1.27; 95% CI 1.02-1.58) compared with patients on no PPI. This association was not significant for omeprazole (hazard ratio 1.16; 95% CI 0.93-1.44). Sensitivity analyses for the coronary artery disease population (acute coronary syndrome versus mixed) and exclusion of a single study due to heterogeneity of reported results did not have significant influence on the effect estimates for any PPIs.Several frequently used PPIs previously thought to be safe for concomitant use with clopidogrel were associated with greater risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Although the data are observational, they highlight the need for randomized controlled trials to evaluate the safety of concomitant PPI and clopidogrel use in patients with coronary artery disease.
| S-EPMC4845227 | biostudies-other
Project description:Atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease represents one of leading cause of mortality and morbidity in Western countries. An increased risk of CV events was identified in patients with peripheral arterial diseases (PADs), which include all arterial diseases, other than coronary arteries and the aorta. In particular, lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) and/or carotid artery disease present growing incidence in general population and a consequent increase in mortality and morbidity. Medical treatment, including antiplatelet therapy, is a cornerstone in management of these patients, even when they are treated with endovascular or surgical procedures. Despite their clinical relevance, data on optimal antiplatelet treatment in this clinical setting are lacking and often derived from clinical trials on coronary artery disease and by subgroups analysis. The purpose of this review is to examine the available data from registries, randomized trials and meta-analysis on antiplatelet treatment in patients with LEAD and carotid stenosis with the aim to provide evidence to support clinical decision making.
| S-EPMC6232353 | biostudies-other