CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

Outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel after acute myocardial infarction: experiences from SWEDEHEART registry Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Ticagrelor With Aspirin in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Evolution of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a 40-year journey '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 Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after PCI in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Elaborately Engineering a Self-Indicating Dual-Drug Nanoassembly for Site-Specific Photothermal-Potentiated Thrombus Penetration and Thrombolysis Gut microbiota induces high platelet response in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction after ticagrelor treatment

Original Research2020 Jun 9.

JOURNAL:Adv Ther. Article Link

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study

Sicong Ma, Zaixin Jiang, YL Han et al.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION - Optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for medically managed acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (MMACS) patients is still unknown. We explored the efficacy and safety of12-month DAPT among MMACS patients.

 

METHODS - In this sub-analysis of the optimal antiplatelet therapy for Chinese Patients with Coronary Artery Disease study (NCT01735305), clinical outcomes among MMACS patients were compared between the < 12-month and12-month DAPT groups. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Safety endpoints included the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 25, BARC 35, and all bleeding events. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare baseline characteristics between the < 12-month and12-month DAPT groups.

 

RESULTS - In this cohort of ACS patients (n = 10,016), MMACS patients (n = 2967) were less likely to use DAPT at 12 (31.64% vs. 67.47%, P < 0.0001) and 24 (13.82% vs. 18.71%, P < 0.0001) months and experienced more ischemic events at 12 (4.55% vs. 3.40%, P = 0.006) and 24 (6.88% vs. 5.08%, P = 0.0004) months than those treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 7049). Among MMACS patients, the rate of primary efficacy endpoint occurring within the second year was significantly higher in the < 12-month DAPT group than in the12-month group both before (2.88% vs. 1.60%, P = 0.040) and after (3.19% vs. 1.71%, P = 0.045) PSM. After PSM, no significant differences in all bleeding, BARC 25, and BARC 35 bleeding were found between the groups.

 

CONCLUSION - MMACS patients with insufficient DAPT management experienced relatively more ischemic events. DAPT for at least 1 year may be beneficial to this special population without significantly increasing the bleeding risks.