CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

科研文章

荐读文献

Conceptual Framework for Addressing Residual Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in the Era of Precision Medicine Cost-Effectiveness of Different Durations of Dual-Antiplatelet Use After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention 6- Versus 24-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients Nonresistant to Aspirin Final Results of the ITALIC Trial (Is There a Life for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel) Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes ACC/AHA Versus ESC Guidelines on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy JACC Guideline Comparison: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Osteoarthritis risk is reduced after treatment with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel: a propensity score matching analysis Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: An Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction 2016 ACC/AHA guideline focused update on duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study

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.