The Single-Syringe Versus the Double-Syringe Techniques of Adenosine Administration for Supraventricular Tachycardia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The intravenous double-syringe technique (DST) of adenosine administration is the first-line treatment for stable supraventricular tachycardia (SVT). Alternatively, the single-syringe technique (SST) was recently found to be potentially beneficial in several studies. This study aimed to perform a meta-analysis of the SST versus the DST of adenosine administration for the treatment of SVT. METHODS: We assessed EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of intervention (NRSIs) comparing the DST to the SST of adenosine administration in patients with SVT. Outcomes included termination rate, termination rate at first dose, total administered dose, adverse effects, and discharge rate. RESULTS: We included four studies (three RCTs and one NRSI) with a total of 178 patients, of whom 99 underwent the SST of adenosine administration. No significant difference was found between treatment groups regarding termination rate, termination rate restricted to RCTs, total administered dose, and discharge rate. Termination rate at first dose (odds ratio 2.87; confidence interval 1.11-7.41; p = 0.03; I2 = 0%) was significantly increased in patients who received the SST. Major adverse effects were observed in only one study. CONCLUSIONS: The SST is probably as safe as the DST and at least as effective for SVT termination, SVT termination at first dose, and discharge rate from the emergency department. However, definitive superiority of one technique is not feasible given the limited sample size. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO identifier nº CRD42022345125.

Ticagrelor with and without aspirin in patients with a prior coronary artery bypass graft undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the TWILIGHT-CABG study.

BACKGROUND: Prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are often older and present with multiple comorbidities. Ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as an effective bleeding-avoidance strategy among high-risk patients. AIMS: We aimed to examine the effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin in prior CABG patients undergoing PCI within the TWILIGHT trial. METHODS: After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were randomised to either aspirin or placebo, in addition to ticagrelor, for 12 months and compared by prior CABG status. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. RESULTS: Out of 7,119 patients, a total of 703 (10.8%) patients had prior CABG within the randomised cohort. Prior CABG patients had more comorbidities and a higher incidence of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding and death, MI or stroke at 1 year after randomisation, compared with patients without prior CABG. Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with significantly less BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding among prior CABG patients compared with DAPT (4.9% vs 9.6%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.90; pinteraction=0.676) and similar rates of death, MI or stroke (10.0% vs 8.7%, HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.87; pinteraction=0.484). When comparing target vessel type, treatment effects were consistent among graft- and native-vessel interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients with prior CABG, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced bleeding without compromising ischaemic outcomes compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Using Cangrelor in High Angiographic Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Patients: A US Hospital Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate a US hospital's cost implications and outcomes of cangrelor use in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with two or more angiographic high-risk features (HRFs), including avoidance of oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment in patients requiring cardiac surgery. Intravenous cangrelor provides direct, immediate onset and rapid-offset P2Y12 inhibition, which may reduce the necessity for oral P2Y12 pretreatment. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed, estimating the annual impact over 3 years of cangrelor availability. Ischemic and bleeding events (48 h) from randomized clinical trial data were extrapolated to 30 days. Event costs were from the CHAMPION PHOENIX Economics substudy. Rates of coronary artery disease (CAD) presentation, PCI, oral P2Y12 pretreatment, and inpatient hospitalization costs were from published literature and clinical experts. Scenario analyses evaluated the impact of cangrelor availability on potential reduced P2Y12 pretreatment rates by 50-100%. Drug costs were 2019 wholesale acquisition costs and, where necessary, all costs were adjusted to 2019 dollars. RESULTS: In a hospital treating 1000 CAD PCI inpatients annually, increasing cangrelor use from 11 to 32% resulted in a reduction in 48-h ischemic events/year by 5.7%, while bleeding events increased by 2.9%. Total costs of $1,135,472 declined 12.8%, with a 50% reduction in P2Y12 pretreatment or 30% with no pretreatment. Savings were driven by a decrease in ischemic events, decrease in glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use, and less need for and shorter oral P2Y12 inhibitor washout period for surgery patients. CONCLUSION: Use of cangrelor in patients with two or more angiographic HRFs may improve outcomes and lower hospital budgets, mainly from avoiding surgery delays necessitated by oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment.

Comparative effects of guided vs. potent P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in acute coronary syndrome: a network meta-analysis of 61 898 patients from 15 randomized trials.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend the use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel for the reduction of ischaemic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, this comes at the expense of increased bleeding. A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy has the potential to overcome this limitation. We aimed at evaluating the comparative safety and efficacy of guided vs. routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different oral P2Y12 inhibitors currently recommended for the treatment of patients with ACS (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor). RCTs including a guided approach (i.e. platelet function or genetic testing) vs. standard selection of P2Y12 inhibitors among patients with ACS were also included. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-scores were used to estimate hierarchies of efficacy and safety. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint was all bleeding. A total of 61 898 patients from 15 RCTs were included. Clopidogrel was used as reference treatment. A guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced MACE (IRR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.98) without any significant trade-off in all bleeding (IRR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55). A guided approach and prasugrel were associated with reduced myocardial infarction. A guided approach, prasugrel, and ticagrelor were associated with reduced stent thrombosis. Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced total and cardiovascular mortality. Prasugrel was associated with increased major bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with increased minor bleeding. The incidence of stroke did not differ between treatments. CONCLUSION: In patients with an ACS, compared with routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy (prasugrel or ticagrelor), a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy is associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided approach for the selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021258603). KEY QUESTION: A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy using platelet function or genetic testing improves outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Nevertheless, the comparative safety and efficacy of a guided versus routine selection of potent P2Y12-inhibiting therapy in acute coronary syndrome has not been explored. KEY FINDING: In a comprehensive network meta-analysis including the totality of available evidence and using clopidogrel as treatment reference, a guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events without any significant trade-off in bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor increased bleeding and only ticagrelor reduced mortality. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: A guided selection of P2Y12-inhibiting therapy represents the strategy associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Estimation of Acutely Ill Medical Patients at Venous Thromboembolism Risk Eligible for Extended Thromboprophylaxis Using APEX Criteria in US Hospitals.

Major medical illnesses place patients at risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Some risk factors including age ≥75 years or history of cancer place them at increased risk of VTE that extends for at least 5 to 6 weeks following hospital admission. Betrixaban thromboprophylaxis is now approved in the United States for this indication. We estimated the annual number of acutely ill medical patients at extended risk of VTE discharged from US hospital. Major medical illnesses (stroke, respiratory failure/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, pneumonia, other infections, and rheumatologic disorders) and 2 common risk factors for extended VTE risk, namely, age ≥75 years and history of cancer (active or past) were examined in 2014 US hospital discharges using the first 3 discharge diagnosis codes in the National Inpatient Sample (database of acute-care hospital discharges from the US Agency for Health Care Quality and Research). In 2014, there were 20.8 million discharges with potentially at risk of nonsurgical-related VTE. Overall, 7.2 million (35%) discharges corresponded to major medical illness that warranted thromboprophylaxis according to 2012 American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guideline. Among them, 2.79 million were aged ≥75 years and 1.36 million had a history of cancer (aged 40-74 years). Overall, 3.48 million discharges were at extended risk of VTE. Many medical inpatients at risk of VTE according to 2012 ACCP guideline might benefit from the awareness of continuing risk and some of these patients might benefit from extended thromboprophylaxis, depending on the risk of bleeding and comorbidities.

Cangrelor reduces the risk of ischemic complications in patients with single-vessel and multi-vessel disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety and efficacy of cangrelor in patients with single-vessel disease (SVD) and multi-vessel disease (MVD). BACKGROUND: Cangrelor, an intravenous, rapidly acting P2Y12 inhibitor, is superior to clopidogrel in reducing ischemic events among patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We studied a modified intention to treat population of patients with SVD and MVD from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven revascularization (IDR), and stent thrombosis (ST) at 48hours. The key safety outcome was non-coronary artery bypass grafting GUSTO severe bleeding at 48hours. RESULTS: Among 10,921 patients, 5,220 (48%) had SVD and 5,701 (52%) had MVD. MVD patients were older and more often had diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, prior stroke, and prior MI. After adjustment, MVD patients had similar rates of 48-hour death/MI/IDR/ST (6.3% vs 4.2%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.6 [95% CI 0.42-6.06]) and GUSTO severe bleeding (0.1% vs 0.2%, P=.67) compared with SVD patients. Consistent with overall trial findings, cangrelor use reduced ischemic complications in patients with both SVD (3.9% vs 4.5%; OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.65-1.12) and MVD (5.5% vs 7.2%; OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.6-0.92, P-interaction=.43). GUSTO severe bleeding outcomes were not significantly increased with cangrelor or clopidogrel in either SVD or MVD patients. CONCLUSION: In the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial, MVD and SVD patients had similar ischemic outcomes at 48hours and 30days. Cangrelor consistently reduced ischemic complications in both SVD and MVD patients without a significant increase in GUSTO severe bleeding. CLINICAL PERSPECTIVES.

A Critical Appraisal of Aspirin in Secondary Prevention: Is Less More?

Aspirin represents the sine qua non for antiplatelet pharmacotherapy in patients with cardiovascular diseases because of its well-established role in secondary prevention and its widespread availability and affordability. Historical studies, conducted in an era that bears little resemblance to contemporary clinical practice, demonstrated large reductions in thrombotic risk when aspirin was compared with placebo, thus forming the evidence base promulgated in practice guidelines and recommendations. P2Y12 inhibitors have mostly been studied in addition to aspirin; dual-antiplatelet therapy proved superiority compared with aspirin monotherapy for the prevention of ischemic events, despite increased bleeding risks. An alternative approach currently under investigation includes evaluation of single-antiplatelet therapy with P2Y12 inhibitors alone versus dual-antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndromes or coronary stent implantation. As the availability of more effective antiplatelet agents increases, it is time to revisit the existing and long-standing paradigm supporting aspirin use for secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events. Ongoing trials will provide new evidence whether the less-is-more strategy is justified.

A critical reappraisal of aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with ischemic heart disease.

Aspirin was established more than a quarter century ago as an evidence-based therapy to reduce recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease based on limited data by contemporary standards. Indeed it is unclear how regulatory agencies would define the optimal dose or duration of aspirin therapy if assessed in the current era. Subsequent clinical investigation has focused on the addition of antithrombotic agents on top of baseline aspirin therapy in the acute and chronic setting to reduce patient's risk of further ischemic events, at the cost of increased bleeding complications. The current armamentarium of potent and predictable antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents has ushered in a new era where clinicians and scientists are contemplating withdrawal of previously established agents to minimize bleeding risk while sustaining efficacy; indeed, subtraction may lead to the next advance in the treatment of acute and chronic ischemic vascular disease.

A randomized trial to compare the safety of rivaroxaban vs aspirin in addition to either clopidogrel or ticagrelor in acute coronary syndrome: The design of the GEMINI-ACS-1 phase II study.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), the combination of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor, given for 12 months remains the standard of care after presentation with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) because it has been shown to be associated with a significant reduction in ischemic events compared with aspirin monotherapy. The factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban was shown to be associated with a significant reduction in the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, and resulted in a nominal reduction in cardiovascular death, when added to background DAPT in the ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 trial; however, there was excessive bleeding with this "triple-therapy" approach. The combination of rivaroxaban with P2Y12 inhibition in a "dual-pathway" approach may be an effective therapeutic regimen for the treatment of ACS, given the known importance of P2Y12 inhibition after stenting and intriguing data that the combination of an anticoagulant with clopidogrel after stenting in patients with atrial fibrillation appears an attractive option to this patient population. GEMINI-ACS-1 is a prospective, randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, active-controlled trial that will assess the safety of dual antithrombotic therapy (rivaroxaban [2.5 mg twice daily] + P2Y12 inhibitor) as compared with DAPT (aspirin [100 mg] + P2Y12 inhibitor) within 10 days of an ACS event in 3,000 patients. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio stratified by intended P2Y12 inhibitor use (clopidogrel 75 mg daily or ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily), with 1500 patients expected in each P2Y12 inhibitor strata. The primary end point is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction clinically significant bleeding (major, minor, or requiring medical attention). The exploratory efficacy determination will be a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and stent thrombosis. GEMINI-ACS-1 will assess the safety and feasibility of dual antithrombotic therapy with rivaroxaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor compared with conventional DAPT for the treatment for patients with recent ACS.