CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Successful Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Lesion Using Minimum Contrast Volume with Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Astro-CHARM, the First 10-year ASCVD Risk Estimator Incorporating Coronary Calcium Improving the Use of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators Therapy With Validated Patient-Centric Risk Estimates Mortality Following Cardiovascular and Bleeding Events Occurring Beyond 1 Year After Coronary Stenting - A Secondary Analysis of the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study Benefit of switching dual antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndrome: the TOPIC (timing of platelet inhibition after acute coronary syndrome) randomized study Intravascular ultrasound guidance in drug-eluting stents implantation: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials Relationship Between Infarct Size and Outcomes Following Primary PCI: Patient-Level Analysis From 10 Randomized Trials Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography 2018: Current Status and Future Directions Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: a review Prognostic impact of baseline glucose levels in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock-a substudy of the IABP-SHOCK II-trial

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.