CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

DAPT Duration

Abstract

Recommended Article

Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial A new strategy for discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy: the RESET Trial (REal Safety and Efficacy of 3-month dual antiplatelet Therapy following Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation) Dual antiplatelet therapy (PEGASUS) vs. dual pathway (COMPASS): a head-to-head in vitro comparison 'Ticagrelor alone vs. dual antiplatelet therapy from 1 month after drug-eluting coronary stenting among patients with STEMI': a post hoc analysis of the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial Acute Coronary Syndrome, Antiplatelet Therapy, and Bleeding: A Clinical Perspective Evolution of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a 40-year journey Polymer-based or Polymer-free Stents in Patients at High Bleeding Risk
|<<... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2020 Nov 3;EIJ-D-20-00556.

JOURNAL：Eurointervention. Article Link

A randomized comparison of Coronary Stents according to Short or Prolonged durations of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: a pre-specified analysis of the SMART-DATE trial

WJ Jang, JB Lee, YB Song et al. Keywords: 6-month vs. 12-month DAPT; ACS; DES

ABSTRACT

AIMS - We sought to compare biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stents(BP-BES) with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting(DP-EES) and zotarolimus-eluting stents(DP-ZES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome(ACS) according to different duration of dual antiplatelet therapy(DAPT).


METHODS AND RESULTS - In the SMART-DATE trial, 2712 patients with ACS underwent randomization for allocation of DAPT (6-month [n=1357] or 12-month or longer [n=1355]) and type of stents (BP-BES [n=901]), DP-EES [n=904], or DP-ZES [n=907]). At 18 months, primary endpoint (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) was 2.6% with BP-BES, 2.0% with DP-EES, and 2.1% with DP-ZES (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.70-2.39, p=0.42 for BP-BES vs. DP-EES and HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.67-2.26, p=0.50 for BP-BES vs. DP-ZES). The treatment effect of BP-BES for the primary endpoint was consistent among patients receiving 6-month DAPT as well as those receiving 12-month or longer DAPT (BP-BES vs. DP-EES, pinteraction=0.48 and BP-BES vs. DP-ZES, pinteraction=0.87). After excluding 179 patients (101 in the BP-BES group) who did not receive allocated DES, per-protocol analysis showed similar results.


CONCLUSIONS - The risk of a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was not significantly different between patients receiving BP-BES vs. DP-EES or DP-ZES across short or prolonged duration of DAPT after ACS.
>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