Should Antiplatelet Therapy Be Withheld Perioperatively? The First Study Examining Outcomes in Patients Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in the Lower Extremity Free Flap Population.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet agents are typically withheld perioperatively because of bleeding concerns. Dual antiplatelet therapy, such as aspirin and clopidogrel, has significant morbidity and mortality benefits in patients with ischemic heart disease or peripheral vascular disease. This study aims to evaluate the impact of perioperative dual antiplatelet therapy in the lower extremity free tissue transfer population. METHODS: Lower extremity free tissue transfers performed by the senior author (K.K.E.) from 2011 to 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, comorbidities, perioperative dual antiplatelet therapy, and free tissue transfer characteristics were recorded. Outcomes of interest included flap success, hematoma formation, blood transfusion requirements, and cardiac event occurrence. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-five free tissue transfers were included. Median age at the time of free tissue transfer was 56.5 years. Median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3. Thirty-four patients were on clopidogrel, which was either withheld (n = 20) or continued (n = 14) on the day of free tissue transfer. Incidence of blood transfusion was significantly higher in both the withheld and continued versus nonclopidogrel groups. Flap success was statistically equivalent between groups (withheld, 90.0 percent; continued, 92.9 percent; nonclopidogrel, 95.0 percent; p = 0.346). Cardiac events occurred most often in the continued group (21.4 percent) compared to the withheld (5.0 percent) and nonclopidogrel (0.6 percent) groups. On multivariate analysis, holding clopidogrel remained significant for increased odds of postoperative transfusion. The clopidogrel group was no longer significant for intraoperative transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increases in volume of blood products transfused, free tissue transfer can be performed safely with perioperative dual antiplatelet therapy. Withholding dual antiplatelet therapy on the day of free tissue transfer was not associated with decreased intraoperative transfusion; thus, dual antiplatelet therapy can safely be continued throughout the operative course to minimize cardiovascular risk. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Benefits and Risks of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review for the 2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack may reduce recurrent stroke but also increase severe bleeding compared with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT). The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association convened an evidence review committee to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits and risks of DAPT compared with SAPT for secondary ischemic stroke prevention. METHODS: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched on December 5, 2019, to identify phase III or IV randomized controlled trials (n≥100) from December 1999 to December 2019. We calculated unadjusted relative risks (RRs) and performed meta-analyses of studies based on the duration of treatment (short [≤90 days] versus long [>90 days]). RESULTS: Three short-duration randomized controlled trials were identified that enrolled mostly patients with minor stroke or high risk transient ischemic attack. In these trials, DAPT, compared with SAPT, was associated with a lower 90-day risk of recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.55-0.83], I 2=37.1%). There was no significant increase in major bleeding with DAPT in short-duration trials (pooled RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 0.93-3.83], I 2=8.9%). In 2 long-duration treatment randomized controlled trials (mean treatment duration, 18-40 months), DAPT was not associated with a significant reduction in recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.79-1.02], I 2=1.4%), but was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (pooled RR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.37-4.30], I 2=75.5%). CONCLUSIONS: DAPT was more effective than SAPT for prevention of secondary ischemic stroke when initiated early after the onset of minor stroke/high-risk transient ischemic attack and treatment duration was <90 days. However, when the treatment duration was longer and initiated later after stroke or transient ischemic attack onset, DAPT was not more effective than SAPT for ischemic stroke prevention and it increased the risk of bleeding.

Trials of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Lack Strategies to Ensure Appropriate Gastroprotection.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal bleeding is a morbid complication of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We evaluated the extent to which contemporary trials of DAPT included steps to ensure appropriate use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) gastroprotection and reported rates of PPI use. METHODS: A methodological review of randomized trials comparing varying durations of DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention. RESULTS: Among 21 trials, none incorporated protocol procedures or guidance for prescribing PPIs. Five reported rates of PPI use (range 25.6-69.1%). DISCUSSION: PPI gastroprotection is overlooked in major trials of DAPT. Appropriate use of PPI gastroprotection represents an important opportunity to improve patient safety.

Contribution of ESC DAPT guideline-endorsed high thrombotic risk features to long-term clinical outcomes among patients with and without high bleeding risk after PCI.

BACKGROUND: Whether the underlying risk of high bleeding risk (HBR) influences the relationship of high thrombotic risk (HTR) features with adverse events after drug-eluting stent implantation remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate (1) the prognostic effect of ESC guideline-endorsed HTR features on long-term clinical outcomes and (2) whether the outcomes of HTR versus non-HTR features vary by HBR status. METHODS: Ten thousand one hundred sixty-seven consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2013 and December 2013 were prospectively enrolled in Fuwai PCI Registry. Patients who are at HTR were defined as: diffuse multivessel disease in diabetic patients, chronic kidney disease, at least three stents implanted, at least three stents lesions treated, bifurcation with two stents implanted, total stent length > 60 mm, or treatment of chronic total occlusion. The definition of HBR was based on the Academic Research Consortium for HBR criteria. The primary ischemic outcome was major adverse cardiac event (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization and stent thrombosis. The primary bleeding outcome was clinically relevant bleeding, defined according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding. RESULTS: With a 2.4-year median follow-up, 4430 patients (43.6%) having HTR experienced a significantly higher risk of MACE (hazard ratio [HR] adjust: 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-1.82; P < 0.001) and device-oriented composite endpoint (composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI, and target lesion revascularization) (HRadjust: 1.52 [1.27-1.83]; P < 0.001), compared to those having non-HTR. The risk of clinically relevant bleeding did not differ between groups (HRadjust: 0.85 [0.66-1.08]; P = 0.174). Associations between HTR and adverse events were similar in HBR and non-HBR groups, without evidence of interaction (all Pinteraction > 0.05); however, adverse event rates were highest among subjects with both HTR and HBR. CONCLUSIONS: ESC guideline-endorsed HTR was associated with significantly increased risk of MACE without any significant differences in clinically relevant bleeding. The presence of HBR does not emerge as a modifier of cardiovascular risk for patients at HTR, suggesting more potent and longer antiplatelet therapy may be beneficial for this patient population.

A 4-item PRECISE-DAPT score for dual antiplatelet therapy duration decision-making.

The originally-proposed PRECISE-DAPT score is a 5-item risk score supporting decision-making for dual antiplatelet therapy1 duration after PCI. It is unknown if a simplified version of the score based on 4 factors (age, hemoglobin, creatinine clearance, prior bleeding), and lacking white-blood cell count, retains potential to guide DAPT duration. The 4-item PRECISE-DAPT was used to categorize 10,081 patients who were randomized to short (3-6 months) or long (12-24 months) DAPT regimen according to high (HBR defined by PRECISE-DAPT ≥25 points) or non-high bleeding risk (PRECISE-DAPT<25) status. Long treatment duration was associated with higher bleeding rates in HBR (ARD +2.22% [95% CI +0.53 to +3.90]) but not in non-HBR patients (ARD +0.25% [-0.14 to +0.64]; pint = 0.026), and associated with lower ischemic risks in non-HBR (ARD -1.44% [95% CI -2.56 to -0.31]), but not in HBR patients (ARD +1.16% [-1.91 to +4.22]; pint = 0.11). Only non-HBR patients experienced lower net clinical adverse events (NACE) with longer DAPT (pint = 0.043). A 4-item simplified version of the PRECISE-DAPT score retains the potential to categorize patients who benefit from prolonged DAPT without concomitant bleeding liability from those who do not.

Advances in the Pharmacogenomics of Antiplatelet Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a highly thrombotic state, and a sustained antiplatelet effect is vital to the prevention of thrombotic complications. Clopidogrel, the most widely used oral P2Y12 receptor antagonist in ACS, has attracted considerable attention because of significant variability in antiplatelet effect depending on the presence of CYP2C19 allele. Other P2Y12 receptor antagonists offer sustained and more predictable antiplatelet effects than clopidogrel albeit at an increased cost. Several studies have demonstrated the promising application of pharmacogenetics in choosing personalized antiplatelet therapy using the point-of-care genotype assays. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Guidelines regarding the genotype-guided approach to the selection of antiplatelet therapy have been conflicting, and studies evaluating the effect of pharmacogenetic-guided selection of antiplatelet therapy on the outcomes have demonstrated mixed results. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies reporting the association of pharmacogenetic-guided selection of antiplatelet therapy and the outcomes in patients with ACS until December 2018. RESULTS: Presence of specific CYP2C19 allele significantly influences clopidogrel metabolism and associated outcomes in patients with ACS. Thrombotic and bleeding complications are more common in patients with loss-of-function (LOF) and gain-of-function (GOF) alleles, respectively. Although the pharmacogenetic-guided approach to the selection of antiplatelet therapy appears promising in ACS, studies have shown conflicting results, and direct randomized evidence linking this approach with the better outcomes is lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Genotype-guided selection of antiplatelet therapy is expected to be useful in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a high risk of adverse outcomes. The patient-physician discussion should be an essential part of this decision-making process. Large-scale multicenter randomized controlled trials using the point-of-care genotype assay are needed to investigate this approach further before its use can be recommended in all comers.

Efficacy and Safety of Guideline-Recommended Risk Score-Directed Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After 2nd-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents.

BACKGROUND: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of guideline-recommended risk score-directed dual antiplatelet therapy (GD-DAPT) based on THE PRECISE-DAPT score after 2nd-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation.Methods and Results:We analyzed 5,131 patients pooled from 4 clinical trials. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to current recommendations on the duration of DAPT and their actual DAPT duration: GD-DAPT (n=2,183), shorter DAPT (n=1,540), longer DAPT (n=1,408). The primary endpoint was the rate of net adverse clinical events (NACE) during the first 12 months. The secondary endpoints were ischemic or bleeding events. Overall, GD-DAPT did not affect NACE (1.2% vs. 1.2% for shorter DAPT and 1.7% for longer DAPT) or bleeding events (0.6% vs. 0.5% and 0.9%), and there were fewer ischemic events (2.8% vs. 4.4% and 4.0%, P=0.03) than with shorter DAPT. Especially in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, GD-DAPT had fewer NACE (1.5% vs. 1.4% and 4.2%; P=0.006) and bleeding events (0.8% vs. 0.5% and 2.8%; P=0.001) than longer DAPT as well as fewer ischemic events (2.8% vs. 4.4% and 4.7%; P=0.03) than shorter DAPT. CONCLUSIONS: GD-DAPT did not affect NACE or bleeding events and reduced the number of ischemic events at 12 months compared with shorter DAPT. For ACS, GD-DAPT was associated with favorable outcomes compared with non-GD-DAPT. Therefore, GD-DAPT may optimize efficacy and safety.