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

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 Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation: a randomized, controlled trial. Individualized antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent deployment: Implication of clinical trials of different durations of dual antiplatelet therapy Extended antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel alone versus clopidogrel plus aspirin after completion of 9- to 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome patients with both high bleeding and ischemic risk. Rationale and design of the OPT-BIRISK double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial Higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) increases the risk of suboptimal platelet inhibition and major cardiovascular ischemic events among ACS patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor 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 Dual-antiplatelet treatment beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation (ARCTIC-Interruption): a randomised trial Switching of Oral Anticoagulation Therapy After PCI in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The RE-DUAL PCI Trial Subanalysis One-year outcome of a prospective trial stopping dual antiplatelet therapy at 3 months after everolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent implantation: ShortT and OPtimal duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy after everolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent (STOPDAPT) trial Global Approach to High Bleeding Risk Patients With Polymer-Free Drug-Coated Coronary Stents: The LF II Study

Clinical TrialJune 19, 2018, Volume 137, Issue 25

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

Study of Two Dose Regimens of Ticagrelor Compared with Clopidogrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Coronary Artery Disease (STEEL-PCI)

Orme RC, Parker WAE, Storey RF et al. Keywords: adenosine; clopidogrel; percutaneous coronary intervention; platelets; ticagrelor

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Ticagrelor has superior efficacy to clopidogrel in the management of acute coronary syndromes but has not been assessed in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD). We compared the pharmacodynamic effects of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in this stable population.


METHODS - 180 aspirin-treated stable CAD patients, who were planned to undergo elective PCI in a single center, were randomized 1:1:1 to either a standard clopidogrel regimen or one of two regimens of ticagrelor, either 90mg (T90) or 60mg twice-daily (T60), both with 180mg loading dose. Cellular adenosine uptake was assessed, at the time of the procedure and pre- and post-dose at 1 month, by adding adenosine 1 μmol/L to aliquots of anticoagulated whole blood and mixing with a stop solution at 0, 15, 30 and 60 seconds then measuring residual plasma adenosine concentration by high-performance liquid chromatography. Systemic plasma adenosine concentration and platelet reactivity were assessed at the same timepoints. High-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) was measured pre- and 18-24 hours post-PCI.

RESULTS - 174 patients underwent an invasive procedure, of which 162 patients received PCI (mean age 65 years, 18% female, 21% with diabetes mellitus). No effect on in vitro adenosine uptake was seen post-dose at 1 month for either ticagrelor dose compared with clopidogrel (residual adenosine at 15s, mean ± SD: clopidogrel 0.274 ± 0.101 μmol/L; T90 0.278 ± 0.134 μmol/L; T60 0.288 ± 0.149 μmol/L; P = 0.37). Similarly no effect of ticagrelor on in vitro adenosine uptake was seen at other timepoints, nor was plasma adenosine concentration affected (all P > 0.1). Both maintenance doses of ticagrelor achieved more potent and consistent platelet inhibition than clopidogrel (VerifyNow PRU, 1 month, mean ± SD: pre-dose, T60: 62 ± 47, T90: 40 ± 38, clopidogrel 181 ± 44; post-dose, T60: 34 ± 30, T90: 24 ± 21, clopidogrel 159 ± 57; all P < 0.0001 for ticagrelor vs clopidogrel). High platelet reactivity was markedly less with both T60 and T90 compared with clopidogrel (VerifyNow PRU>208, 1-month post-dose: 0%, 0% and 21%, respectively). Median (IQR) hsTnT increase was 16.9 (6.5-46.9) ng/l for clopidogrel, 22.4 (5.5-53.8) ng/L for T60 and 17.7 (8.1-43.5) ng/L for T90 (P = 0.95). There was a trend towards less dyspnea with T60 versus T90 (7.1% vs 19.0%; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS - Maintenance therapy with T60 or T90 had no detectable effect on cellular adenosine uptake at 1 month, nor was there any effect on systemic plasma adenosine levels. Both regimens of ticagrelor achieved greater and more consistent platelet inhibition than clopidogrel but did not appear to affect troponin release following PCI.

Clinical Trial Registration - URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT02327624