CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

DAPT Duration

Abstract

Recommended Article

State of the art: duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary stent implantation – past, present and future perspectives A prospective, randomized, open-label trial of 6-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Rationale and design of the Rationale and design of the comparison between a P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing implantation of coronary drug-eluting stents (SMART-CHOICE): A prospective multicenter randomized trial 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 Inhibition of Platelet Aggregation After Coronary Stenting in Patients Receiving Oral Anticoagulation Six Versus 12 Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent: Randomized Substudy of the I-LOVE-IT 2 Trial Mortality Following Cardiovascular and Bleeding Events Occurring Beyond 1 Year After Coronary Stenting - A Secondary Analysis of the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study A Genotype-Guided Strategy for Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Primary PCI

Original Research2018 Jan;34(1):31-37.

JOURNAL:Can J Cardiol. Article Link

Cost-Effectiveness of Different Durations of Dual-Antiplatelet Use After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Arbel Y, Bennell MC, Wijeysundera HC et al. Keywords: Cost-Effectiveness; Dual-Antiplatelet; Different Durations

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - There is uncertainty regarding the optimal duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Our goal was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different durations of DAPT.


METHODS - We created a probabilistic patient-level Markov microsimulation model to assess the discounted lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of short duration (3-6 months: short-duration group) vs standard therapy (12 months: standard-duration group) vs prolonged therapy (30-36 months: long-durationgroup) in patients undergoing PCI.


RESULTS - The majority of patients in the model underwent PCI for stable angina (47.1%) with second-generation drug-eluting stents (62%) and were receiving clopidogrel (83.6%). Short-duration DAPT was the most effective strategy (7.163 ± 1.098 QALYs) compared with standard-duration DAPT (7.161 ± 1.097 QALYs) and long-duration DAPT (7.156 ± 1.097 QALYs). However, the magnitude of these differences was very small. Similarly, the average discounted lifetime cost was CAN$24,859 ± $6533 for short duration, $25,045 ± $6533 for standard duration, and $25,046 ± $6548 for long duration. Thus, in the base-case analysis, short duration was dominant, being more effective and less expensive. However, there was a moderate degree of uncertainty, because short duration was the preferred option in only ∼ 55% of simulations at a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000.


CONCLUSIONS - Based on a stable angina cohort receiving clopidogrel with second-generation stents, a short duration of DAPT was marginally better. However, the differences are minimal, and decisions about duration of therapy should be driven by clinical data, patient risk of adverse events, including bleeding, and cardiovascular events.

Copyright © 2017 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.