CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

急性冠脉综合征

科研文章

荐读文献

Improvement of Clinical Outcome in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Between 1999 And 2016 in China : The Prospective, Multicenter Registry MOODY Study Contemporary Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Myocardial Infarction in the Absence of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Colchicine after Myocardial Infarction Mortality in STEMI patients without standard modifiable risk factors: a sex-disaggregated analysis of SWEDEHEART registry data Optimal Timing of Intervention in NSTE-ACS Without Pre-Treatment The EARLY Randomized Trial Early Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Effect of a Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusion Strategy on Major Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anemia: The REALITY Randomized Clinical Trial Nonculprit Lesion Myocardial Infarction Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Late Presentation of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Colchicine Inhibits Neutrophil Extracellular Trap Formation in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Clinical Trial2019 Sep 1. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908973.

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes

Schüpke S, Neumann FJ, ISAR-REACT 5 Trial Investigators. Keywords: ticagrelor vs prasugrel; ACS

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - The relative merits of ticagrelor as compared with prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom invasive evaluation is planned are uncertain.


METHODS - In this multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes and for whom invasive evaluation was planned to receive either ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year. A major secondary end point (the safety end point) was bleeding.


RESULTS - A total of 4018 patients underwent randomization. A primary-end point event occurred in 184 of 2012 patients (9.3%) in the ticagrelor group and in 137 of 2006 patients (6.9%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.70; P = 0.006). The respective incidences of the individual components of the primary end point in the ticagrelor group and the prasugrel group were as follows: death, 4.5% and 3.7%; myocardial infarction, 4.8% and 3.0%; and stroke, 1.1% and 1.0%. Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 1.3% of patients assigned to ticagrelor and 1.0% of patients assigned to prasugrel, and definite stent thrombosis occurred in 1.1% and 0.6%, respectively. Major bleeding (as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale) was observed in 5.4% of patients in the ticagrelor group and in 4.8% of patients in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.51; P = 0.46).


CONCLUSIONS - Among patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation, the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was significantly lower among those who received prasugrel than among those who received ticagrelor, and the incidence of major bleeding was not significantly different between the two groups. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and Deutsches Herzzentrum München; ISAR-REACT 5 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01944800.).

 

Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.