CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Impact of epicardial adipose tissue on cardiovascular haemodynamics, metabolic profile, and prognosis in heart failure Successful bailout stenting strategy against lethal coronary dissection involving left main bifurcation Management of left main disease: an update Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy with Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Discrepancies in Measurement of the Thoracic Aorta: JACC Review Topic of the Week Role of intravascular ultrasound in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Health Status After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis
|<<... 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 ...>>|

Review Article2017 Aug 29.[Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL：Drugs. Article Link

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration: Reconciling the Inconsistencies

Costa F, Windecker S, Valgimigli M. Keywords: dual antiplatelet therapy duration; recurrent ischemic events; bleeding events; stent thrombosis

ABSTRACT

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) prevents recurrent ischemic events after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) as well as stent thrombosis (ST) in patients with prior stent implantation. Nevertheless, these benefits are counterbalanced by a significant bleeding hazard, which is directly related to the treatment duration. Although DAPT has been extensively studied in numerous clinical trials, optimal treatment duration is still debated, mostly because of apparent inconsistencies among studies. Shortened treatment duration of 6 or 3 months was shown to mitigate bleeding risk compared with consensus-grounded 12-month standard duration, without any apparent excess of ischemic events. However, recent trials showed that a >12-month course of treatment reduces ischemic events but increases bleeding compared with 12 months. The inconsistent benefit of a longer DAPT course compared with shorter treatment durations is puzzling, and requires a careful appraisal of between-studies differences. We sought to summarize the existing evidence aiming at reconciling apparent inconsistencies among these studies, as well as thoroughly discuss the possible increased risk of fatal events associated with long-term DAPT. Benefits and risks of prolonging or shortening DAPT duration will be discussed, with a focus on treatment individualization. Finally, we will provide an outlook for possible future directions in the field.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top