CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

科学研究

Abstract

Recommended Article

A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-label Trial to Compare Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Stabilized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction after Percutan eous Coronary Intervention: rationale and design of the TALOS-AMI trial Comparison of newer generation self-expandable vs. balloon-expandable valves in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the randomized SOLVE-TAVI trial Association of White Matter Hyperintensities and Cardiovascular Disease: The Importance of Microcirculatory Disease Edoxaban versus Vitamin K Antagonist for Atrial Fibrillation after TAVR Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Right ventricular function and outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement Valve‐in‐Valve for Degenerated Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Valve‐in‐Valve for Degenerated Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses: A 3‐Center Comparison of Hemodynamic and 1‐Year Outcome Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups

Original ResearchVolume 73, Issue 8, March 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Article Link

Interval From Initiation of Prasugrel to Coronary Angiography in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

J Silvain, T Rakowski, B Lattuca et al. Keywords: acute coronary syndrome; myocardial infarction; percutaneous coronary intervention; prasugrel; pretreatment

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - In the ACCOAST (A Comparison of Prasugrel at PCI or Time of Diagnosis of Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial, the prasugrel pre-treatment strategy versus placebo was associated with excess bleeding complications and no improved ischemic outcome in nonST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI). Whether patients with the longest pre-treatment duration had an ischemic benefit is unknown.

 

OBJECTIVES - This pre-specified analysis of the ACCOAST trial aimed to assess the effect of pre-treatment duration with prasugrel (time from randomization to angiography) on outcomes.

 

METHODS - Within the 4,033 patients randomized in the ACCOAST trial, pre-treatment duration was available in 4,001 patients (99.2%). The population of the trial was divided into quartiles of pre-treatment duration (0.1 to 2.5 h, 2.5 to 3.9 h, 3.9 to 13.6 h, and >13.6 h) with an evaluation of the primary efficacy endpoint of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, urgent revascularization or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor bailout use. Secondary efficacy outcomes including cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke; all-cause death; stent thrombosis and safety outcomes (all coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] or non-CABG TIMI [Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction] major bleeding) were also evaluated at 7 days.

 

RESULTS - The primary efficacy outcome of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, urgent revascularization or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor bailout use did not differ between the quartiles of pre-treatment duration in the trial population (p = 0.17 for interaction). None of the secondary efficacy outcomes were found to be dependent on pre-treatment duration. The safety outcome of all CABG or non-CABG TIMI major bleeding did not differ between the quartiles of pre-treatment duration (p = 0.37 for interaction).

 

CONCLUSIONS - In nonST-segment elevation MI patients, the excess risk of bleeding and the absence of ischemic benefit were consistent across the quartiles of increasing duration of prasugrel pre-treatment. (A Comparison of Prasugrel at PCI or Time of Diagnosis of Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [ACCOAST]; NCT01015287)