CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

DAPT Duration

Abstract

Recommended Article

Patient-oriented composite endpoints and net adverse clinical events with ticagrelor monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration: Reconciling the Inconsistencies Dual Antithrombotic Therapy with Dabigatran after PCI in Atrial Fibrillation Dual Antiplatelet TherapyIs It Time to Cut the Cord With Aspirin? Prevention of Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing PCI ACC/AHA Versus ESC Guidelines on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy JACC Guideline Comparison: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Ticagrelor plus aspirin for 1 month, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months versus aspirin plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 12 months, followed by aspirin monotherapy for 12 months after implantation of a drug-eluting stent: a multicenter, open-label, randomized superiority trial

Original Research2015 Oct;11(6):625-33.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

The effect of complete percutaneous revascularisation with and without intravascular ultrasound guidance in the drugeluting stent era

Magalhaes MA, Minha S, Torguson R et al. Keywords: IVUS; DES; complete revascularisation

ABSTRACT


AIMS - Our aim was to compare the outcomes of complete revascularisation (CR) and incomplete revascularisation (IR) in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), with and without intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance, in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era.


METHODS AND RESULTS - Overall, 2,132 consecutive patients with multivessel CAD, defined as at least two epicardial vessels with >70% stenosis, had at least one DES implant. Chronic total occlusions were not analysed. Successful treatment of epicardial vessels and significant branches was termed CR; otherwise, treatment was defined as IR. CR and IR were further categorised according to the use of IVUS. The primary outcome was death or Q-wave myocardial infarction (QWMI). Secondary outcomes included the rates of non-QWMI and repeat revascularisation, the latter assessed as either target vessel revascularisation (TVR) or target lesion revascularisation (TLR) at one year. CR was associated with lower rates of death/QWMI (HR 0.66 [0.4-0.9]; p=0.048) and non-QWMI at one year (1.1% vs. 2.6%; p=0.017). Completeness of revascularisation was not independently associated with repeat intervention, but rates of both TVR (89% vs. 93%; p<0.001) and TLR (91% vs. 95%; p<0.001) were higher with CR than IR. IVUS decreased the rates of TLR irrespective of completeness of revascularisation (p-interaction=0.75).


CONCLUSIONS - CR in selected patients gives better outcomes than IR in multivessel CAD at one year. IVUS guidance can further improve results by reducing rates of repeat intervention irrespective of completeness of revascularisation.