CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

DAPT Duration

Abstract

Recommended Article

Dual antiplatelet therapy: how, how long, and in which patients? Dual antiplatelet therapy (PEGASUS) vs. dual pathway (COMPASS): a head-to-head in vitro comparison Major Bleeding Rates in Atrial Fibrillation Patients on Single, Dual, or Triple Antithrombotic Therapy Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after PCI in Patients at High Bleeding Risk P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy with Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Study of Two Dose Regimens of Ticagrelor Compared with Clopidogrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Coronary Artery Disease (STEEL-PCI) Impact of age on the comparison between short-term vs 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with the COMBO dual therapy stent: 2-Year follow-up results of the REDUCE trial
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...>>|

Original ResearchApril 2020 Vol 13, Issue 4

JOURNAL：Circ Cardiovasc Interv Article Link

Global Approach to High Bleeding Risk Patients With Polymer-Free Drug-Coated Coronary Stents: The LF II Study

MW Krucoff , P Urban, J-F Tanguay et al. Keywords: high bleeding risk; PCI; DCS

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - High bleeding risk (HBR) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have been widely excluded from randomized device registration trials. The LF study (LEADERS FREE) reported superior outcomes of HBR patients receiving 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with a polymer-free drug-coated stent (DCS). LFII was designed to assess the reproducibility and generalizability of the benefits of DCS observed in LF to inform the US Food and Drug Administration in a device registration decision.

 

METHODS - LFII was a single-arm study using HBR inclusion/exclusion criteria and 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with DCS, identical to LF. The 365-day rates of the primary effectiveness (clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) and safety (composite cardiac death and myocardial infarction) end points were reported using a propensity-stratified analysis compared with the LF bare metal stent arm patients as controls.

 

RESULTS - A total of 1203 LFII patients were enrolled with an average 1.7 HBR criteria per patient, including 60.7% >75 years of age, 34.1% on anticoagulants, and 14.7% with renal failure. Propensity-adjusted 365-day clinically indicated target lesion revascularization was significantly lower with DCS (7.2% versus 9.2%; hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52–0.98]; P=0.0338 for superiority), as was the primary safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction) composite (9.3% versus 12.4%; hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.55–0.94]; P=0.0150 for superiority). Stent thrombosis rates were 2.0% DCS and 2.2% bare metal stent. Major bleeding at 1 year occurred in 7.2% DCS patients and 7.2% bare metal stent.

 

CONCLUSIONS - LFII reproduces the results of the DCS arm of LF in an independent, predominantly North American cohort of HBR patients.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top