The safety and efficacy of indobufen or aspirin combined with clopidogrel in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Currently, the standard treatment for patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following acute myocardial infarction (MI) involves dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a combination of aspirin and a potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. However, the potential benefits of aspirin were partially constrained by the intolerance of some patients. The safety and efficacy of indobufen, an alternative antiplatelet agents to aspirin, in patients with AMI after PCI are yet to be thoroughly investigated.This retrospective study was conducted at a single center and utilized propensity score matching. The enrollment spanned from January 2019 to June 2022, incorporating patients with AMI after PCI. The participants were categorized into two groups based on discharged prescriptions: the aspirin DAPT group and the indobufen DAPT group. The primary endpoint focused on net adverse clinical event (NACE), defined as a composite outcome, including cardiac death, recurrence of MI, definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization (TLR), ischemic stroke and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria type 2, 3, or 5. All the patients underwent a one-year follow-up period.A total of 1451 patients were enrolled in this study, with 258 assigned to the indobufen DAPT group and 1193 to the aspirin DAPT group. Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 224 patients were retained in each group. In the indobufen DAPT group, 58 individuals (25.9%) experienced the primary endpoint within one year, compared to 52 individuals (23.2%) in the aspirin DAPT group (HR 1.128, 95% CI 0.776-1.639, p = .527). Specifically, no significant differences were observed in either the efficacy endpoint (MACCE, 20.1% vs. 14.7%, HR 1.392, 95% CI 0.893-2.170, p = .146) or the safety endpoint (BARC 2,3 or 5, 8.04% vs. 10.30%, HR 0.779, p = .427). These findings remained consistent at 1, 3, or 6 months. Additionally, the incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly lower in indobufen DAPT group compared to the aspirin DAPT group (7.1% vs. 14.3%, p = .022).Our research reveals that the efficacy and safety of indobufen are comparable to aspirin in Chinese patients with AMI following PCI. Given the potential advantages of indobufen in alleviating gastrointestinal symptoms, we propose it as a viable alternative for individuals intolerant to aspirin.

What is the context? Currently, the standard treatment for patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention following acute myocardial infarction involves dual antiplatelet therapy with a combination of aspirin and a potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor.However, the potential benefits of aspirin were partially constrained by the intolerance of some patients.The safety and efficacy of indobufen, an alternative antiplatelet agents to aspirin, in patients with AMI after PCI are yet to be thoroughly investigated.What is new? While both American and European clinical guidelines recommend the use of indobufen as an alternative treatment for patients who cannot tolerate aspirin, there exists a limited body of research on this subject.Our research is the first to address this gap by comparing the efficacy and safety of indobufen and aspirin in patients with AMI.Our research reveals that the efficacy and safety of indobufen are comparable to aspirin in Chinese patients with AMI following PCI. Given the potential advantages of indobufen in alleviating gastrointestinal symptoms, we propose it as a viable alternative for individuals intolerant to aspirin.What is the impact? These findings might pave the way for further exploration of alternatives to aspirin in patients with AMI.

Comparison of Different Hydration Strategies in Patients with Very Low-Risk Profiles of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy.

BACKGROUND Hydration remains the mainstay of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) prevention, and new biomarkers of cystatin C (Cys C) and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) have been suggested. This study aimed to explore whether hydration is essential in patients with very low-risk profiles of CIN who are undergoing coronary angiography. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 150 patients were enrolled and randomly distributed to 3 groups: the Preventive Group (n=50, saline hydration was given 6 h before the procedure until 12 h after the procedure), the Remedial Group (n=50, saline hydration was given after procedure for 12 h), and the No Hydration (NH) group (n=50, saline was only given during the procedure). Serum creatinine (Cr), Cys C, and urinary NGAL were tested 3 times at different times. RESULTS Six patients were excluded because of Mehran risk score >2. There was no CIN among 144 individuals. At 24 h and at 72 h after the procedure, we found no significant differences in the levels of Cr and Cys C (0.72±0.11 mg/L for the Preventive Group, 0.67±0.14 mg/L for the Remedial Group, and 0.70±0.1 6 mg/L for the NH Group) among the 3 groups. Urinary NGAL also did not differ significantly among the 3 groups at 6 h or at 48 h (6.31±6.60 ng/ml for the Preventive Group, 5.00±5.86 ng/ml for the Remedial Group, and 6.97±6.37 ng/ml for the NH Group) after the procedure. Subgroup analysis in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) showed that there was no significant difference in serum Cr, Cys C, or urinary NGAL at different time points among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS Saline hydration during the perioperative period might be unnecessary in patients with very low-risk profiles of CIN.

Loading doses of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in preventing periprocedural myocardial infarction in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Periprocedural myocardial infarction is a common complication following percutaneous coronary intervention. The present study was conducted with an aim to compare the safety and efficacy of loading doses of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in preventing periprocedural myocardial infarction in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: A total of 114 patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention were assigned to clopidogrel group (n = 57, the loading and maintenance doses were 300 and 75 mg qd for clopidogrel, and 300 and 100 mg qd for aspirin), or ticagrelor group (n = 57, the loading and maintenance doses were 180 and 90 mg bid for ticagrelor, and 300 and 100 mg qd for aspirin). Cardiac biomarkers were measured before, 8 hours, and 24 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention. The percutaneous coronary intervention-related periprocedural myocardial infarction was defined according to the fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (2018). RESULTS: The overall incidence of percutaneous coronary intervention-related periprocedural myocardial infarction was 21.1%. The ticagrelor group showed a significantly lower incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction (12.3% vs 29.8%, p = 0.022) and numerically lower bleeding events (3.5% vs 8.8%, p = 0.242) as compared with clopidogrel group. No patient had major adverse cardiovascular events during the 1-month follow-up. The levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein did not differ significantly between the two groups (p > 0.05), indicating that the benefits of ticagrelor were not from its anti-inflammatory effects. Multivariable analysis showed that the use of ticagrelor (odds ratio: 0.50; 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.87; p = 0.014) and number of stents (odds ratio: 2.75; 95% confidence interval: 1.25-6.06; p = 0.012) were independent predictors of periprocedural myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with a loading dose of ticagrelor seems to be superior in reducing the incidence of percutaneous coronary intervention-related periprocedural myocardial infarction in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome as compared with clopidogrel.

Low-dose adjunctive cilostazol in patients with complex lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Patients with complex coronary lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have more major adverse cardiac events (MACE) than do those with simpler cases. Therefore, intensive antiplatelet therapy might be needed in these patients. A total of 127 patients with complex lesions undergoing PCI in the Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University from October 2012 to April 2014 were randomized to receive either dual (aspirin plus clopidogrel, DAPT, n = 66), or triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus clopidogrel plus cilostazol; TAPT, n = 61). Patients in the TAPT group received low-dose cilostazol (100 mg loading, followed with 50 mg twice per day) for 3-6 months. The primary endpoint was composite MACE. The complex coronary target lesions were defined as at least one of the following: left main disease; severe 3-vessel disease; chronic total occlusion lesions; true bifurcation lesion; ostial lesions; severe calcified lesions; and highly thrombotic lesions. The two groups had similar baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. One-year clinical outcomes showed that the TAPT group had significantly lower incidences of myocardial infarction (1.6% vs 13.6%, P = 0.018) and MACE (1.6% vs 16.7%, P = 0.004) than DAPT group. The DAPT group had two cases of stent thrombosis, while the TAPT group did not. Furthermore, adjunctive low-dose cilostazol didn't significantly increase the incidence of bleeding events (26.2% vs 19.7%, P = 0.381) regardless of major (4.9% vs 4.5%, P = 0.921) or minor (21.3% vs 15.2%, P = 0.368) bleeding events. In conclusion, low-dose adjunctive cilostazol seems superior to dual antiplatelet therapy in reducing recurrent ischemic events in patients with complex coronary lesions and the two test groups have a similar incidence of bleeding events.

Effect of Calcium Dobesilate in Preventing Contrast-Induced Nephropathy in Patients with Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the protective effect of calcium dobesilate against contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) after coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: A total of 130 patients with diabetes and CKD estimated glomerular filtration rate: 30-90 mL/min/1.73m2 were enrolled and included in the analysis. They were divided into experimental (n=65) and control groups (n=65). Patients in the experimental group were administered oral calcium dobesilate (500 mg) three times daily for 2 days before and 3 days after the procedure. The serum creatinine (SCr), cystatin C (Cys C), and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) levels were measured before and after the procedure. RESULTS: The mean SCr level at 24h after the procedure was found to be significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (79.1±19.6 µmol/L vs. 87.0±19.3 µmol/L, p=0.023). However, the Cys C and NGAL levels were not significantly different between the two groups at all measurement time points (all p>0.05). The incidence of CIN defined by the SCr level was significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (3 [4.6%] vs. 13 [20.0%], p=0.017). However, the incidence of CIN defined by the Cys C level was not statistically different between the two groups (7 [10.8%] vs. 7 [10.8%], p=1.000). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that calcium dobesilate has no preventive effect against CIN in patients with diabetes and CKD.

Effect of calcium dobesilate in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the protective effect of calcium dobesilate against contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) after coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: A total of 130 patients with diabetes and CKD estimated glomerular filtration rate: 30-90 mL/min/1.73m2 were enrolled and included in the analysis. They were divided into experimental (n=65) and control groups (n=65). Patients in the experimental group were administered oral calcium dobesilate (500 mg) three times daily for 2 days before and 3 days after the procedure. The serum creatinine (SCr), cystatin C (Cys C), and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) levels were measured before and after the procedure. RESULTS: The mean SCr level at 24h after the procedure was found to be significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (79.1±19.6 μmol/L vs. 87.0±19.3 μmol/L, p=0.023). However, the Cys C and NGAL levels were not significantly different between the two groups at all measurement time points (all p>0.05). The incidence of CIN defined by the SCr level was significantly lower in the experimental group than in the control group (3 [4.6%] vs. 13 [20.0%], p=0.017). However, the incidence of CIN defined by the Cys C level was not statistically different between the two groups (7 [10.8%] vs. 7 [10.8%], p=1.000). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that calcium dobesilate has no preventive effect against CIN in patients with diabetes and CKD.