Safety and efficacy of stent-assisted coil embolization with periprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of acutely ruptured intracranial aneurysms.

PURPOSE: Despite growing evidence for the effectiveness of stent-assisted coil embolization (SAC) in treating acutely ruptured aneurysms, the safety of stent placement in acute phase remains controversial because of concerns for stent-induced thromboembolism and hemorrhagic events attributable to the necessity of antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, we investigated the safety and efficacy of SAC with periprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compared with the coiling-only technique to determine whether it is a promising treatment strategy for ruptured aneurysms. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 203 enrolled patients with acutely ruptured aneurysms, categorizing them into two groups: SAC and coiling-only groups. Comparative analyses between the two groups regarding angiographic results, clinical outcomes, and procedure-related complications were performed. A subgroup analysis of procedural complications was conducted on patients who did not receive chronic antithrombotic medications to alleviate their influence before hospitalization. RESULTS: 130 (64.0%) patients were treated using the coiling-only technique, whereas 73 (36.0%) underwent SAC. There was a trend to a higher complete obliteration rate (p = 0.061) and significantly lower recanalization rate (p = 0.030) at angiographic follow-up in the SAC group compared to the coiling-only group. Postprocedural cerebral infarction occurred less frequently in the SAC group (8.2%) than in the coiling-only group (17.7%), showing a significant difference (p = 0.044). Although the ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage rate was significantly higher in the SAC group than in the coiling-only group (26.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.031), the incidence of symptomatic ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage was comparable. Subgroup analysis excluding patients receiving chronic antithrombotic medications showed similar results. CONCLUSION: SAC with periprocedural DAPT could be a safe and effective treatment strategy for acutely ruptured aneurysms. Moreover, it might have a protective effect on postprocedural cerebral infarction without increasing the risk of symptomatic hemorrhagic complications.

Temporal trends in use of antisecretory agents among patients administered clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Antisecretory drugs are commonly prescribed with clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding in high-risk patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, omeprazole and esomeprazole (inhibiting proton pump inhibitors [PPIs]) may increase cardiovascular event rates on co-administration with clopidogrel. This study aimed to examine trends in the use of antisecretory agents in patients administered clopidogrel-based DAPT and the concomitant use of clopidogrel and inhibiting PPIs. METHODS: We used National Inpatient Sample data compiled by the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service from 2009 to 2020. Further, we identified patients who were prescribed clopidogrel-based DAPT after PCI and investigated the concomitant use of antisecretory agents with clopidogrel. To verify the annual trend of drug utilization, we used the Cochran-Armitage trend test. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2020, the percentage of H2 receptor antagonist users decreased steadily (from 82.5% in 2009 to 25.3% in 2020); instead, the percentage of PPI users increased (from 23.7% in 2009 to 82.0% in 2020). The use of inhibiting PPI also increased (from 4.2% in 2009 to 30.7% in 2020). Potassium competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) were rarely used before 2019; however, in 2020, it accounted for 7.8% of the antisecretory users. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the use of inhibiting PPIs increased steadily in patients administered clopidogrel-based DAPT therapy. This is a major concern since the concomitant use of inhibiting PPIs with clopidogrel could increase the risk of cardiovascular events.

Comparison of Dual Antiplatelet Therapies for Minor, Nondisabling, Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) appears to be an effective treatment option for minor (nondisabling) acute ischemic stroke. This conclusion is based on trials that include both transient ischemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke; however, these 2 conditions may differ. Objective: To compare DAPT regimens specifically for minor stroke. Data Sources: PubMed was searched for randomized clinical trials published up to November 4, 2023. Search terms strategy included TIA, transient ischemic attack, minor stroke, or moderate stroke, with the filter randomized controlled trial. Unpublished data on minor stroke were sourced from authors and/or institutions. Study Selection: Trials testing DAPT within the first 24 hours of a minor stroke (defined as a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≤5) were included by consensus. Of 1508 studies screened, 6 (0.3%) initially met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The study was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by multiple observers. Bayesian fixed-effect network meta-analysis was conducted. Secondary analysis performed for high-risk TIA alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Treatments were ranked using a probability measure called surface under the cumulative rank curve (SUCRA). The primary outcome was subsequent ischemic stroke at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included major hemorrhage, mortality, and hemorrhagic stroke. The number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) were obtained. Results: Five trials were included that described 28 148 patients, of whom 22 203 (78.9%) had a minor stroke. Of these, 13 995 (63.0%) were in DAPT groups and 8208 (37.0%) in aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) groups. Aspirin and ticagrelor had a 94% probability of being the superior treatment for minor stroke (SUCRA, 0.94) for the primary outcome. Both aspirin and ticagrelor (NNT, 40; 95% CI, 31-64) and aspirin and clopidogrel (NNT, 58; 95% CI, 39-136) were superior to aspirin alone in the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke at 90 days. Both treatments had higher rates of major hemorrhage than aspirin alone (NNH for aspirin and ticagrelor, 284; 95% CI, 108-1715 vs NNH for aspirin and clopidogrel, 330; 95% CI, 118-3430), but neither had increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke or death. For high-risk TIA, ticagrelor and aspirin had a 60% probability (SUCRA, 0.60) and clopidogrel and aspirin had a 40% probability (SUCRA 0.40) of being a superior treatment; neither was optimum, but both were superior to aspirin alone for the primary outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that DAPT with aspirin and ticagrelor has higher probability of being the superior treatment among patients with minor stroke when presence of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles has not been excluded. For patients with TIA, the superiority of aspirin and ticagrelor vs aspirin and clopidogrel was not demonstrated.

In mild ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA, DAPT started ≤72 h after onset reduced new stroke and increased bleeding at 90 d.

SOURCE CITATION: Gao Y, Chen W, Pan Y, et al; INSPIRES Investigators. Dual antiplatelet treatment up to 72 hours after ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:2413-2424. 38157499.

Prognostic Impact of CYP2C19 Genotypes on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Older Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Carriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles have increased adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention, but limited data are available for older patients. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of CYP2C19 genotypes on clinical outcomes in older patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study included 1201 older patients (aged ≥75 years) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and received clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy in South Korea. Patients were grouped on the basis of CYP2C19 genotypes. The primary outcome was 3-year major adverse cardiac events, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Older patients were grouped into 3 groups: normal metabolizer (36.6%), intermediate metabolizer (48.1%), and poor metabolizer (15.2%). The occurrence of the primary outcome was significantly different among the groups (3.1, 7.0, and 6.2% in the normal metabolizer, intermediate metabolizer, and poor metabolizer groups, respectively; P=0.02). The incidence rate of all-cause death at 3 years was greater in the intermediate metabolizer and poor metabolizer groups (8.1% and 9.2%, respectively) compared with that in the normal metabolizer group (3.5%, P=0.03) without significant differences in major bleeding. In the multivariable analysis, the intermediate metabolizer and poor metabolizer groups were independent predictors of 3-year clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients, the presence of any CYP2C19 loss-of-function allele was found to be predictive of a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events within 3 years following percutaneous coronary intervention. This finding suggests a need for further investigation into an optimal antiplatelet strategy for older patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT04734028.

Trends in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy of Aspirin and Clopidogrel and Outcomes in Ischemic Stroke Patients Noneligible for POINT/CHANCE Trial Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials established the benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel (DAPT-AC) in early-presenting patients with minor ischemic stroke. However, the impact of these trials over time on the use and outcomes of DAPT-AC among the patients with nonminor or late-presenting stroke who do not meet the eligibility criteria of these trials has not been delineated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a multicenter stroke registry, this study examined yearly changes from April 2008 to August 2022 in DAPT-AC use for stroke patients ineligible for CHANCE/POINT (Clopidogrel in High-Risk Patients with Acute Nondisabling Cerebrovascular Events/Platelet-Oriented Inhibition in New TIA and Minor Ischemic Stroke) clinical trials due to National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale >4 or late arrival beyond 24 hours of onset. A total of 32 118 patients (age, 68.1±13.1 years; male, 58.5%) with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of 4 (interquartile range, 1-7) were analyzed. In 2008, DAPT-AC was used in 33.0%, other antiplatelets in 62.7%, and no antiplatelet in 4.3%. The frequency of DAPT-AC was relatively unchanged through 2013, when the CHANCE trial was published, and then increased steadily, reaching 78% in 2022, while other antiplatelets decreased to 17.8% in 2022 (Ptrend<0.001). From 2011 to 2022, clinical outcomes nonsignificantly improved, with an average relative risk reduction of 2%/y for the composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality, both among patients treated with DAPT-AC and patients treated with other antiplatelets. CONCLUSIONS: Use of DAPT-AC in stroke patients with stroke ineligible for recent DAPT clinical trials increased markedly and steadily after CHANCE publication in 2013, reaching deployment in nearly 4 of every 5 patients by 2022. The secondary prevention in patients with ischemic stroke seems to be gradually improving, possibly due to the enhancement of risk factor control.

Guideline versus clinician recommended duration of dual antiplatelet therapy following acute coronary syndrome (ANZACS-QI 78).

AIM: The recommended duration of dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for patients without atrial fibrillation varies from 1 month to 1 year depending on the balance of risks of ischaemia and major bleeding. Patients on DAPT with a high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding are also recommended to receive a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Our aim was to audit current practice against the 2020 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline recommendations. METHODS: One hundred consecutive ACS patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention discharged from Middlemore Hospital and without atrial fibrillation in the first quarter of 2023 were studied. ANZACS-QI ischaemic (I) and bleeding (B) risk scores were calculated, with patients categorised in four groups based on ESC recommendations-low I/low B risk, low I/high B, high I/low B and high I/high B. Guideline and clinician recommended duration of DAPT and prescription of PPI were compared. RESULTS: All patients were planned for DAPT at discharge and 91% a PPI. Up to four out of five ACS patients could have been planned for shorter DAPT durations based on the ESC guideline recommendations. Over half of included patients (53%) had a high bleeding risk, yet 85% of these patients received 12 months of DAPT despite ESC recommendations of 1-3 months. CONCLUSIONS: There was a divergence between clinical practice and the recommendations of the 2020 ESC guidelines. We discuss these results in relation to the updated August 2023 ESC guidelines, which have reaffirmed a 12-month duration of DAPT as the default position.

An Aspirin-Free Strategy for Immediate Treatment Following Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: There was no study evaluating the effects of an aspirin-free strategy in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an aspirin-free strategy in patients undergoing complex PCI. METHODS: We conducted the prespecified subgroup analysis based on complex PCI in the STOPDAPT-3 (ShorT and OPtimal duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy after everolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent-3), which randomly compared low-dose prasugrel (3.75 mg/d) monotherapy to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with low-dose prasugrel and aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. Complex PCI was defined as any of the following 6 criteria: 3 vessels treated, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, total stent length >60 mm, or a target of chronic total occlusion. The coprimary endpoints were major bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5) and cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke) at 1 month. RESULTS: Of the 5,966 study patients, there were 1,230 patients (20.6%) with complex PCI. Regardless of complex PCI, the effects of no aspirin relative to DAPT were not significant for the coprimary bleeding (complex PCI: 5.30% vs 3.70%; HR: 1.44; 95% CI: 0.84-2.47; P = 0.18 and noncomplex PCI: 4.26% vs 4.97%; HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.65-1.11; P = 0.24; P for interaction = 0.08) and cardiovascular (complex PCI: 5.78% vs 5.93%; HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.62-1.55; P = 0.92 and noncomplex PCI: 3.70% vs 3.10%; HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.88-1.63; P = 0.25; P for interaction = 0.48) endpoints without significant interactions. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of the aspirin-free strategy relative to standard DAPT for the cardiovascular and major bleeding events were not different regardless of complex PCI. (ShorT and OPtimal duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy after everolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent-3 [STOPDAPT-3]; NCT04609111).

Ticagrelor alone versus ticagrelor plus aspirin from month 1 to month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ULTIMATE-DAPT): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Following percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement to treat acute coronary syndromes, international clinical guidelines generally recommend dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for 12 months to prevent myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis. However, data on single antiplatelet therapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor earlier than 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with an acute coronary syndrome are scarce. The aim of this trial was to assess whether the use of ticagrelor alone, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, could reduce the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding events without an accompanying increase in major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (MACCE). METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, patients aged 18 years or older with an acute coronary syndrome who completed the IVUS-ACS study and who had no major ischaemic or bleeding events after 1-month treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy were randomly assigned to receive oral ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) plus oral aspirin (100 mg once daily) or oral ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) plus a matching oral placebo, beginning 1 month and ending at 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention (11 months in total). Recruitment took place at 58 centres in China, Italy, Pakistan, and the UK. Patients were required to remain event-free for 1 month on dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Randomisation was done using a web-based system, stratified by acute coronary syndrome type, diabetes, IVUS-ACS randomisation, and site, using dynamic minimisation. The primary superiority endpoint was clinically relevant bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [known as BARC] types 2, 3, or 5). The primary non-inferiority endpoint was MACCE (defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, definite stent thrombosis, or clinically driven target vessel revascularisation), with an expected event rate of 6·2% in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group and an absolute non-inferiority margin of 2·5 percentage points between 1 month and 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention. The two co-primary endpoints were tested sequentially; the primary superiority endpoint had to be met for hypothesis testing of the MACCE outcome to proceed. All principal analyses were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03971500, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 21, 2019, and Oct 27, 2022, 3400 (97·0%) of the 3505 participants in the IVUS-ACS study were randomly assigned (1700 patients to ticagrelor plus aspirin and 1700 patients to ticagrelor plus placebo). 12-month follow-up was completed by 3399 (>99·9%) patients. Between month 1 and month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention, clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 35 patients (2·1%) in the ticagrelor plus placebo group and in 78 patients (4·6%) in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·45 [95% CI 0·30 to 0·66]; p<0·0001). MACCE occurred in 61 patients (3·6%) in the ticagrelor plus placebo group and in 63 patients (3·7%) in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group (absolute difference -0·1% [95% CI -1·4% to 1·2%]; HR 0·98 [95% CI 0·69 to 1·39]; pnon-inferiority<0·0001, psuperiority=0·89). INTERPRETATION: In patients with an acute coronary syndrome who had percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary drug-eluting stents and remained event-free for 1 month on dual antiplatelet therapy, treatment with ticagrelor alone between month 1 and month 12 after the intervention resulted in a lower rate of clinically relevant bleeding and a similar rate of MACCE compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. Along with the results from previous studies, these findings show that most patients in this population can benefit from superior clinical outcomes with aspirin discontinuation and maintenance on ticagrelor monotherapy after 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. FUNDING: The Chinese Society of Cardiology, the National Natural Scientific Foundation of China, and the Jiangsu Provincial & Nanjing Municipal Clinical Trial Project. TRANSLATION: For the Mandarin translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Regimens for High-Bleeding Risk Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis of Adverse Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Patients of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) at a high-bleeding risk (HBR) often require dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. Clopidogrel and ticagrelor are the most commonly used antiplatelet agents in DAPT regimens. However, the safety profiles of these drugs in ACS patients at HBR remain a subject of ongoing debate. AIM: To investigate any difference between the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor used as a part of DAPT regimen in ACS patients at HBR. METHODS: A systematic search on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify experimental and observational studies published up to the knowledge cutoff date in September 2023. Studies comparing the safety of clopidogrel and ticagrelor in ACS patients at HBR were included for analysis. The primary outcomes assessed were major bleeding events, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI), while secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and net adverse clinical and cerebral events (NACCE). RESULTS: We included a total of 8 observational studies in our meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a statistically significant increase in the risk of MI (pooled RR = 1.43; 95% CI 1.12-1.83; P = 0.005) in the patients using clopidogrel. There were no statistically significant differences in major bleeding events (pooled RR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.82-1.09; P = 0.44), stroke (pooled RR = 1.36; 95% CI 0.86-2.14; P = 0.18), all-cause mortality (pooled RR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.97-1.41; P = 0.10), MACCE (pooled RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.76-1.50; P = 0.69) and NACCE (pooled RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.66-1.37; P = 0.78) between the two groups. Subgroup analyses based on region were performed. CONCLUSION: Both drugs are generally safe for treating ACS patients with HBR at baseline, although a higher risk of MI was observed with the use of clopidogrel. Nevertheless, drug choice should factor in regional variations, patient-specific characteristics, cost, accessibility, and potential drug interactions.

Safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents for patients at high risk of bleedings: A network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Among different coronary stents implanted in High Bleeding Risk (HBR) patients with an indication for short antiplatelet therapy, no comparisons in terms of efficacy have been provided. METHODS: A Network Meta Analysis was performed including all randomized controlled trials comparing different coronary stents evaluated in HBR patients. Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACEs) as defined by each included trial were the primary end point, whereas TLR (target lesion revascularization), TVR (target vessel revascularization), stent thrombosis and total and major (BARC3-5) bleedings were the secondary ones. RESULTS: A total of four studies (ONYX ONE, LEADERS FREE, SENIOR and HBR in BIO-RESORT) including 6637 patients were analyzed with different kind of stents and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) length (1 or 6 months) on 12 months follow-up. About one-third of these patients were defined HBR due to indication for oral anticoagulation. All drug eluting stents (DESs) reduced risk of MACE compared to Bare Metal Stents (BMSs) when followed by a 1-month DAPT. At SUCRA analysis, Orsiro was the device with the highest probability of performing best. Rates of TLR and TVR were significantly lower when using Resolute Onyx, Synergy and BioFreedom stents in comparison to BMS when followed by 1-month DAPT, with Synergy ranking best. Synergy also showed a significantly lower number of stent thrombosis compared to BMS (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.06-0.93), while Orsiro and Resolute Integrity showed the highest probability of performing best. CONCLUSION: In HBRs patients, all DESs were superior to BMSs in terms of efficacy and safety. Among DESs, Orsiro was the one with the highest ranking in terms of MACE, mainly driven by a reduced incidence of repeated revascularization and stent thrombosis.

Optimizing Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in the Perioperative Period for Spine Surgery After Recent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Comprehensive Review, Synthesis, and Catalyst for Protocol Formulation.

The increased incidence of spine surgery within the past decade has highlighted the importance of robust perioperative management to improve patient outcomes overall. Coronary artery disease is a common medical comorbidity present in the population of individuals who receive surgery for spinal pathology that is often treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention. Discontinuation of DAPT before surgical intervention is typically indicated; however, contradictory evidence exists in the literature regarding the timing of DAPT use and discontinuation in the perioperative period. We review the most recent cardiac and spine literature on the intricacies of percutaneous coronary intervention and its associated risks in the postoperative period. We further propose protocols for DAPT use after both elective and urgent spine surgery to optimize perioperative care.

Ticagrelor with or without aspirin following percutaneous coronary intervention in high-risk patients with concomitant peripheral artery disease: A subgroup analysis of the TWILIGHT randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antiplatelet regimen after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) is still debated. This analysis aimed to compare the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients with PAD undergoing PCI. METHODS: In the TWILIGHT trial, patients at high ischemic or bleeding risk that underwent PCI were randomized after 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to aspirin or matching placebo in addition to open-label ticagrelor for 12 additional months. In this post-hoc analysis, patient cohorts were examined according to the presence or absence of PAD. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Endpoints were assessed at 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: Among 7,119 patients, 489 (7%) had PAD and were older, more likely to have comorbidities, and multivessel disease. PAD patients had more bleeding or ischemic complications than no-PAD patients. Ticagrelor monotherapy compared to ticagrelor plus aspirin was associated with less BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding in PAD (4.6% vs 8.7%; HR 0.52; 95%CI 0.25-1.07) and no-PAD patients (4.0% vs 7.0%; HR 0.56; 95%CI 0.45-0.69; interaction P-value .830) and a similar risk of death, MI, or stroke in these 2 groups (interaction P-value .446). CONCLUSIONS: Despite their higher ischemic and bleeding risk, patients with PAD undergoing PCI derived a consistent benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT in terms of bleeding reduction without any relevant increase in ischemic events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY INFORMATION:: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT02270242.

Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel Monotherapy vs Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Patient-Level Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it remains unclear whether the treatment efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) depends on the type of P2Y12 inhibitor. Objective: To assess the risks and benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy or clopidogrel monotherapy compared with standard DAPT after PCI. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, TCTMD, and the European Society of Cardiology website were searched from inception to September 10, 2023, without language restriction. Study Selection: Included studies were randomized clinical trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with DAPT on adjudicated end points in patients without indication to oral anticoagulation undergoing PCI. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Patient-level data provided by each trial were synthesized into a pooled dataset and analyzed using a 1-step mixed-effects model. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary objective was to determine noninferiority of ticagrelor or clopidogrel monotherapy vs DAPT on the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the per-protocol analysis with a 1.15 margin for the hazard ratio (HR). Key secondary end points were major bleeding and net adverse clinical events (NACE), including the primary end point and major bleeding. Results: Analyses included 6 randomized trials including 25 960 patients undergoing PCI, of whom 24 394 patients (12 403 patients receiving DAPT; 8292 patients receiving ticagrelor monotherapy; 3654 patients receiving clopidogrel monotherapy; 45 patients receiving prasugrel monotherapy) were retained in the per-protocol analysis. Trials of ticagrelor monotherapy were conducted in Asia, Europe, and North America; trials of clopidogrel monotherapy were all conducted in Asia. Ticagrelor was noninferior to DAPT for the primary end point (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74-1.06; P for noninferiority = .004), but clopidogrel was not noninferior (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.87; P for noninferiority > .99), with this finding driven by noncardiovascular death. The risk of major bleeding was lower with both ticagrelor (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.62; P < .001) and clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81; P = .006; P for interaction = 0.88). NACE were lower with ticagrelor (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64-0.86, P < .001) but not with clopidogrel monotherapy (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.78-1.28; P = .99; P for interaction = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that ticagrelor monotherapy was noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke and superior for major bleeding and NACE. Clopidogrel monotherapy was similarly associated with reduced bleeding but was not noninferior to DAPT for all-cause death, MI, or stroke, largely because of risk observed in 1 trial that exclusively included East Asian patients and a hazard that was driven by an excess of noncardiovascular death.

Prasugrel Single Antiplatelet Therapy versus Aspirin and Clopidogrel Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Flow Diverter Treatment for Cerebral Aneurysms: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The optimal antiplatelet regimen after flow diverter treatment of cerebral aneurysms is still a matter of debate. A single antiplatelet therapy might be advantageous in determined clinical scenarios. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of prasugrel single antiplatelet therapy versus aspirin and clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of 4 retrospective multicenter studies including ruptured and unruptured aneurysms treated with flow diversion using either prasugrel single antiplatelet therapy or dual antiplatelet therapy. Primary end points were the occurrence of any kind of procedure- or device-related thromboembolic complications and complete aneurysm occlusion at the latest radiologic follow-up (mean, 18 months). Dichotomized comparisons of outcomes were performed between single antiplatelet therapy and dual antiplatelet therapy. Additionally, the influence of various patient- and aneurysm-related variables on the occurrence of thromboembolic complications was investigated using multivariable backward logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 222 patients with 251 aneurysms were included, 90 (40.5%) in the single antiplatelet therapy and 132 (59.5%) in the dual antiplatelet therapy group. The primary outcome-procedure- or device-related thromboembolic complications-occurred in 6 patients (6.6%) of the single antiplatelet therapy and in 12 patients (9.0%) of the dual antiplatelet therapy group (P = .62; OR, 0.712; 95% CI, 0.260-1.930). The primary treatment efficacy end point was reached in 82 patients (80.4%) of the single antiplatelet therapy and in 115 patients (78.2%) of the dual antiplatelet therapy group (P = .752; OR, 1.141; 95% CI, 0.599-2.101). Logistic regression showed that non-surface-modified flow diverters (P = .014) and fusiform aneurysm morphology (P = .004) significantly increased the probability of thromboembolic complications. CONCLUSIONS: Prasugrel single antiplatelet therapy after flow diverter treatment may be as safe and effective as dual antiplatelet therapy and could, therefore, be a valid alternative in selected patients. Further prospective comparative studies are required to validate our findings.

PRECISE-DAPT, ARC-HBR, or Simplified Clinical Evaluation for the Prediction of Major Bleeding After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in older Patients.

Older patients have been remarkably underrepresented in bleeding risk cohorts. Thus, the PRECISE-DAPT (Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy) and Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) scores are not validated in older adults. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the PRECISE-DAPT and ARC-HBR scores in an exclusively older population and assess the prognostic value of a truly simplified clinical evaluation (SCE), consisting of only 3 binary clinical variables (hemoglobin <11 g/100 ml, previous bleeding, and anticipated use of anticoagulants). This is a retrospective analysis of the prospective single-center older-HCD registry. Consecutive patients aged ≥75 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention from 2012 to 2019 were included. The primary end point was postdischarge bleeding at 12 months of follow-up, defined according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 criteria. A total of 693 patients with a mean age of 81 (±4.4) years were included in the study and 60 patients (6.8%) met the primary end point. The PRECISE-DAPT and ARC-HBR scores did not significantly predict postdischarge bleeding in the Cox regression models (hazard ratio 1.65 [0.78 to 3.42] and 1.46 [0.72 to 4.24], respectively), whereas the SCE outperformed both scores (hazard ratio 2.47, 1.34 to 4.49). All 3 scores exhibited a moderate discriminatory potential, as determined by a receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis (areas under the curve 0.601, 0.621, and 0.616, respectively), with no significant differences between them. The SCE showed an Integrated Discrimination Improvement of 0.25, p = 0.02 (SCE vs ARC-HBR) and 0.24, p = 0.01 (SCE vs PRECISE-DAPT), with an Net Reclassification Improvement of 6.54%, p = 0.37 and 7.12%, p = 0.43, respectively. In conclusion, the PRECISE-DAPT score and ARC-HBR criteria showed insufficient predictive value in older adults. A truly SCE consisting of 3 easily accessible variables not only provides equal discriminatory potential but also demonstrates superior predictive value, as determined by Cox regression models. This makes it a highly appealing tool for risk stratification, pending its evaluation in larger prospective studies.