CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

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) 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 Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes 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 Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study 6-month versus 12-month or longer dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (SMART-DATE): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial
|<<... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...>>|

Original Research2018 Jun 12;137(24):2551-2553.

JOURNAL： Article Link

Conceptual Framework for Addressing Residual Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in the Era of Precision Medicine

Patel KV, Pandey A, de Lemos JA et al. Keywords: atherosclerosis; biomarkers; precision medicine; residual risk; secondary prevention

ABSTRACT

Until recently, therapies to mitigate atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk have been limited to lifestyle interventions, blood pressure-lowering medications, high-intensity statin therapy, antiplatelet agents, and, in select patients, coronary artery revascularization. Despite administration of these evidence-based therapies, substantial residual risk for cardiovascular events persists, particularly among individuals with known ASCVD. Moreover, the current guideline-based approach does not adequately account for patient-specific, causal pathways that lead to ASCVD progression and complications. In the past few years, multiple new pharmacological agents, targeting conceptually distinct pathophysiological targets, have been shown in large and well-conducted clinical trials to lower cardiovascular risk among patients with established ASCVD receiving guideline-directed medical care. These evidenced-based therapies reduce event rates and, in some cases, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality; these benefits confirm important new disease targets and challenge the adequacy of the current standard of care for secondary prevention.

After years of treating our patients after an acute coronary syndrome event with the same core group of medications that have been proven to be safe, beneficial, and cost-effective, a diverse array of potentially beneficial options to address residual risk is now available. The near simultaneous development of these new approaches to secondary prevention disrupts existing paradigms regarding assessment and treatment of residual risk. For example, consider a hypothetical patient with obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hyperlipidemia who had a non-ST elevation myocardial infarction and received an intracoronary drug-eluting stent. This patient would likely be …

Please click the "Article Link" to address the full text.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top