CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

急性冠脉综合征

科研文章

荐读文献

Complete Revascularization with Multivessel PCI for Myocardial Infarction Refractory Angina: From Pathophysiology to New Therapeutic Nonpharmacological Technologies Phosphoproteomic Analysis of Neonatal Regenerative Myocardium Revealed Important Roles of CHK1 via Activating mTORC1/P70S6K Pathway Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock Improved outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years are related to implementation of evidence-based treatments: experiences from the SWEDEHEART registry 1995-2014 Cardiovascular Mortality After Type 1 and Type 2 Myocardial Infarction in Young Adults Association of the PHACTR1/EDN1 Genetic Locus With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Diagnosis and Prognosis of Coronary Artery Disease with SPECT and PET Implications of Alternative Definitions of Peri-Procedural Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Revascularization Incidence and prognostic implication of unrecognized myocardial scar characterized by cardiac magnetic resonance in diabetic patients without clinical evidence of myocardial infarction

Clinical Trial2018 Jan 30;71(4):371-381.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

1-Year Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Primary Angioplasty for Myocardial Infarction Treated With Prasugrel Versus Ticagrelor

Motovska Z, Hlinomaz O, PRAGUE-18 Study Group et al. Keywords: myocardial infarction; outcome; prasugrel; primary percutaneous coronary intervention; switch; ticagrelor

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Early outcomes of patients in the PRAGUE-18 (Comparison of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction) study did not find any significant differences between 2 potent P2Y12 inhibitors.



OBJECTIVES - The 1-year follow-up of the PRAGUE-18 study focused on: 1) a comparison of efficacy and safety between prasugrel and ticagrelor; and 2) the risk of major ischemic events related to an economically motivated post-discharge switch to clopidogrel.

METHODS - A total of 1,230 patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to prasugrel or ticagrelor with an intended treatment duration of 12 months. The combined endpoint was cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke at 1 year. Because patients had to cover the costs of study medication after hospital discharge, some patients decided to switch to clopidogrel.

RESULTS - The endpoint occurred in 6.6% of prasugrel patients and in 5.7% of ticagrelor patients (hazard ratio: 1.167; 95% confidence interval: 0.742 to 1.835; p = 0.503). No significant differences were found in: cardiovascular death (3.3% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.769), MI (3.0% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.611), stroke (1.1% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.423), all-cause death (4.7% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.654), definite stent thrombosis (1.1% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.535), all bleeding (10.9% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.999), and TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) major bleeding (0.9% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.754). The percentage of patients who switched to clopidogrel for economic reasons was 34.1% (n = 216) for prasugrel and 44.4% (n = 265) for ticagrelor (p = 0.003). Patients who were economically motivated to switch to clopidogrel had (compared with patients who continued the study medications) a lower risk of major cardiovascular events; however, they also had lower ischemic risk.

CONCLUSIONS - Prasugrel and ticagrelor are similarly effective during the first year after MI. Economically motivated early post-discharge switches to clopidogrel were not associated with an increased risk of ischemic events. (Comparison of Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction [PRAGUE-18]; NCT02808767).

Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.