CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Left-main restenosis in the DES era-a call for action Aggressive Measures to Decrease Causes of delay and associated mortality in patients transferred with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction Nonsystem reasons for delay in door-to-balloon time and associated in-hospital mortality: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry High-Sensitivity Troponins and Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction Intravascular ultrasound guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention in ostial chronic total occlusions: a description of the technique and procedural results Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction DK CRUSH系列研究总结 White Blood Cell Count and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Contemporary Era: Insights From the PARIS Study (Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients Registry) China PEACE risk estimation tool for in-hospital death from acute myocardial infarction: an early risk classification tree for decisions about fibrinolytic therapy

Original ResearchVolume 73, Issue 25, July 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Relation to Vascular Risk in the COMPASS Trial

SS Anand, JW Eikelboom, COMPASS Trial Investigators. Keywords: net-clinical benefit; risk stratification; rivaroxaban; vascular disease

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that the combination of low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced major vascular events in patients with stable vascular disease.

 

OBJECTIVES- The purpose of this study was to identify subsets of patients at higher risk of recurrent vascular events, which may help focus the use of rivaroxaban and aspirin therapy.

 

METHODS - COMPASS patients with vascular disease were risk stratified using 2 methods: the REACH (REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) atherothrombosis risk score and CART (Classification and Regression Tree) analysis. The absolute risk differences for rivaroxaban with aspirin were compared to aspirin alone over 30 months for the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or vascular amputation; for severe bleeding; and for the net clinical benefit.

 

RESULTS- High-risk patients using the REACH score were those with 2 or more vascular beds affected, history of heart failure (HF), or renal insufficiency, and by CART analysis were those with 2 vascular beds affected, history of HF, or diabetes. Rivaroxaban and aspirin combination reduced the serious vascular event incidence by 25% (4.48% vs. 5.95%, hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.85), equivalent to 23 events prevented per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months, at the cost of a nonsignificant 34% increase in severe bleeding (1.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.88), or 2 events caused per 1,000 patients treated. Among patients with 1 high-risk feature identified from the CART analysis, rivaroxaban and aspirin prevented 33 serious vascular events, whereas in lower-risk patients, rivaroxaban and aspirin treatment led to the avoidance of 10 events per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months.

 

CONCLUSIONS- In patients with vascular disease, further risk stratification can identify higher-risk patients (2 vascular beds affected, HF, renal insufficiency, or diabetes). The net clinical benefit remains favorable for most patients treated with rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin.