Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: An On-Treatment Analysis From a Multicenter Registry.

Background: The net clinical benefit of ticagrelor over clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has recently been questioned by observational studies which did not account for time-dependent confounders. We aimed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel accounting for non-adherence in a real-life setting. Methods: This is a prospective, multicenter cohort study of patients with ACS discharged on ticagrelor or clopidogrel between 2015 and 2019. Major exclusions were previous intracranial bleeding, and the use of prasugrel or oral anticoagulation. Association of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy with 1-year risk of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium Type 3 or 5 bleeding; major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite endpoint of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, or urgent target lesion revascularization; definite/probable stent thrombosis; vascular death; and net adverse clinical event (a composite endpoint of major bleeding and MACE) were analyzed according to the "on-treatment" principle, using fully adjusted Cox and Fine-Gray regression models with doubly robust inverse probability of censoring weighted estimators. Results: Among 2,070 patients (mean age 63 years, 27% women, 62.5% ST-elevation MI), 1,035 were discharged on ticagrelor and clopidogrel, respectively. Ticagrelor-treated patients were younger and had few comorbidities, but high rates of medication non-compliance, compared with clopidogrel users. After comprehensive multivariate adjustments, ticagrelor did not increase the risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel [subhazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-2.05], while proved superior in reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.90), vascular death (subhazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.97) and definite/probable stent thrombosis (subhazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79); thereby resulting in a favorable net clinical benefit (hazard ratio 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.98) compared with clopidogrel. Results from sensitivity analyses were consistent with those from the primary analysis, whereas those from the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis went in the opposite direction. Conclusion: Among all-comers with ACS, ticagrelor did not significantly increase the risk of major bleeding, while resulting in a net clinical benefit compared with clopidogrel. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings in high bleeding risk populations. CREA-ARIAM Andalucía: (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02500290); Current pre-specified analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04630288).

[Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically-ill patient. Update. Consensus of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units-Spanish Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (SEMICYUC-SENPE): nutritional assessment]. / Recomendaciones para el soporte nutricional y metabólico especializado del paciente crítico. Actualización. Consenso SEMICYUC-SENPE: valoración del estado nutricional.

Current parameters to assess nutritional status in critically-ill patients are useful to evaluate nutritional status prior to admission to the intensive care unit. However, these parameters are of little utility once the patient's nutritional status has been altered by the acute process and its treatment. Changes in water distribution affect anthropometric variables and biochemical biomarkers, which in turn are affected by synthesis and degradation processes. Increased plasma levels of prealbumin and retinol -proteins with a short half-life- can indicate adequate response to nutritional support, while reduced levels of these proteins indicate further metabolic stress. The parameters used in functional assessment, such as those employed to assess muscular or immune function, are often altered by drugs or the presence of infection or polyneuropathy. However, some parameters can be used to monitor metabolic response and refeeding or can aid prognostic evaluation.

[Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically ill-patient. Update. Consensus of the Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Coronary Units-Spanish Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (SEMICYUC-SENPE): obese patient]. / Recomendaciones para el soporte nutricional y metabólico especializado del paciente crítico. Actualización. Consenso SEMICYUC-SENPE: paciente obeso.

As a response to metabolic stress, obese critically-ill patients have the same risk of nutritional deficiency as the non-obese and can develop protein-energy malnutrition with accelerated loss of muscle mass. The primary aim of nutritional support in these patients should be to minimize loss of lean mass and accurately evaluate energy expenditure. However, routinely-used formulae can overestimate calorie requirements if the patient's actual weight is used. Consequently, the use of adjusted or ideal weight is recommended with these formulae, although indirect calorimetry is the method of choice. Controversy surrounds the question of whether a strict nutritional support criterion, adjusted to the patient's requirements, should be applied or whether a certain degree of hyponutrition should be allowed. Current evidence suggested that hypocaloric nutrition can improve results, partly due to a lower rate of infectious complications and better control of hyperglycemia. Therefore, hypocaloric and hyperproteic nutrition, whether enteral or parenteral, should be standard practice in the nutritional support of critically-ill obese patients when not contraindicated. Widely accepted recommendations consist of no more than 60-70% of requirements or administration of 11-14 kcal/kg current body weight/day or 22-25 kcal/kg ideal weight/day, with 2-2.5 g/kg ideal weight/day of proteins. In a broad sense, hypocaloric-hyperprotein regimens can be considered specific to obese critically-ill patients, although the complications related to comorbidities in these patients may require other therapeutic possibilities to be considered, with specific nutrients for hyperglycemia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and sepsis. However, there are no prospective randomized trials with this type of nutrition in this specific population subgroup and the available data are drawn from the general population of critically-ill patients. Consequently, caution should be exercised when interpreting these data.

Fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in the contemporary management of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. Insights from a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Fondaparinux is thought to have the most favorable risk-benefit profile among all anticoagulants in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). However, conflicting findings exist whether this holds true in current clinical practice. We aimed to assess the net clinical benefit of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in the contemporary management of NSTE-ACS. METHODS: Analysis of prospective multicenter registry data of NSTE-ACS patients who received fondaparinux or enoxaparin from February 2015, through December 2017. Survival models within a competing risks framework including site-specific random effects, were used to assess the composite of clinically relevant bleedings and major adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days. RESULTS: Of 2094 patients, 1724 (82%) received enoxaparin and 370 (18%) fondaparinux. Both groups were comparable except for a lower prevalence of diabetes and renal impairment, and greater use of transradial approach in the fondaparinux group. Multivariate analysis revealed a net clinical benefit in favour of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin (Subhazard Ratio [SHR] 0.59; 95%CI 0.37-0.92), mainly driven by a reduction in bleeding (SHR 0.57; 95%CI 0.37-0.89). Exploratory analysis suggested greater reductions in bleeding with fondaparinux among patients undergoing transradial approach, revealing a significant interaction between treatment and vascular access on the multiplicative scale (Pinteraction = 0.0056), but not on an additive scale (P = 0.457). Propensity-score-matching analysis yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary management of NSTE-ACS, fondaparinux seems to provide a favorable net clinical benefit compared with enoxaparin, primarily driven by a bleeding reduction. Effect modification on the safety profile of fondaparinux by the vascular access approach warrants further investigation.

Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically-ill patient: update. Consensus SEMICYUC-SENPE: nutritional assessment.

Current parameters to assess nutritional status in critically-ill patients are useful to evaluate nutritional status prior to admission to the intensive care unit. However, these parameters are of little utility once the patient's nutritional status has been altered by the acute process and its treatment. Changes in water distribution affect anthropometric variables and biochemical biomarkers, which in turn are affected by synthesis and degradation processes. Increased plasma levels of prealbumin and retinol -proteins with a short half-life- can indicate adequate response to nutritional support, while reduced levels of these proteins indicate further metabolic stress. The parameters used in functional assessment, such as those employed to assess muscular or immune function, are often altered by drugs or the presence of infection or polyneuropathy. However, some parameters can be used to monitor metabolic response and refeeding or can aid prognostic evaluation.

Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically-ill patient: update. Consensus SEMICYUC-SENPE: obese patient.

As a response to metabolic stress, obese critically-ill patients have the same risk of nutritional deficiency as the non-obese and can develop protein-energy malnutrition with accelerated loss of muscle mass. The primary aim of nutritional support in these patients should be to minimize loss of lean mass and accurately evaluate energy expenditure. However, routinely used formulae can overestimate calorie requirements if the patient's actual weight is used. Consequently, the use of adjusted or ideal weight is recommended with these formulae, although indirect calorimetry is the method of choice. Controversy surrounds the question of whether a strict nutritional support criterion, adjusted to the patient's requirements, should be applied or whether a certain degree of hyponutrition should be allowed. Current evidence suggested that hypocaloric nutrition can improve results, partly due to a lower rate of infectious complications and better control of hyperglycemia. Therefore, hypocaloric and hyperproteic nutrition, whether enteral or parenteral, should be standard practice in the nutritional support of critically-ill obese patients when not contraindicated. Widely accepted recommendations consist of no more than 60-70% of requirements or administration of 11-14 kcal/kg current body weight/day or 22-25 kcal/kg ideal weight/day, with 2-2.5 g/kg ideal weight/day of proteins. In a broad sense, hypocaloric-hyperprotein regimens can be considered specific to obese critically-ill patients, although the complications related to comorbidities in these patients may require other therapeutic possibilities to be considered, with specific nutrients for hyperglycemia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and sepsis. However, there are no prospective randomized trials with this type of nutrition in this specific population subgroup and the available data are drawn from the general population of critically-ill patients. Consequently, caution should be exercised when interpreting these data.