RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the perioperative continuation of aspirin in patients with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) undergoing noncardiac surgery. However, supporting evidence is limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare continuing aspirin monotherapy vs temporarily holding all antiplatelet therapy before noncardiac surgery in patients with previous DES implantation. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had received a DES >1 year previously and were undergoing elective noncardiac surgery either to continue aspirin or to discontinue all antiplatelet agents 5 days before noncardiac surgery. Antiplatelet therapy was recommended to be resumed no later than 48 hours after surgery, unless contraindicated. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke between 5 days before and 30 days after noncardiac surgery. RESULTS: A total of 1,010 patients underwent randomization. Among 926 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (462 patients in aspirin monotherapy group and 464 patients in the no-antiplatelet therapy group), the primary composite outcome occurred in 3 patients (0.6%) in the aspirin monotherapy group and 4 patients (0.9%) in the no antiplatelet group (difference, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI: -1.3 to 0.9; P > 0.99). There was no stent thrombosis in either group. The incidence of major bleeding did not differ significantly between groups (6.5% vs 5.2%; P = 0.39), whereas minor bleeding was significantly more frequent in the aspirin group (14.9% vs 10.1%; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing low-to-intermediate risk noncardiac surgery >1 year after stent implantation primarily with a DES, in the setting of lower-than-expected event rates, we failed to identify a significant difference between perioperative aspirin monotherapy and no antiplatelet therapy with respect to ischemic outcomes or major bleeding. (Perioperative Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Drug-eluting Stent Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery [ASSURE-DES]; NCT02797548).
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is preferred for treating severe aortic stenosis in older, frail populations, yet the impact of frailty on economic and clinical outcomes of TAVI is not well studied. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2175 TAVI patients from 2015 to 2019, using Korea's National Health Insurance Service database, stratifying patients into low, intermediate, and high-frailty groups, using the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). Health care costs, admissions, and total length of hospitalization were analyzed using Wilcoxon-rank test 12 months pre- and post-TAVI. Composite endpoint of death, stroke, and major bleeding, with individual outcomes, were compared using χ2 tests and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Mean age was 80.2 years, and 47.3% were male; 747 (34.3%) were low frailty, 1159 (53.3%) were moderate frailty, and 269 (12.4%) were high frailty. After TAVI, medical costs decreased in the intermediate- (pre-TAVI: 2,269,000 KRW [$1668 USD], post-TAVI: 1,607,000 KRW [$1181 USD]; P < 0.001) and high-frailty groups (pre-TAVI: 3,949,000 KRW [$2904 USD], post-TAVI: 2,188,000 KRW [$1609 USD]; P < 0.001). All frailty groups had shorter length of hospital stay post-TAVI (26 to 21 days in the low-frailty, 44 to 31 days in the intermediate-frailty, and 65 to 41 days in the high-frailty group; all P <0.001). The composite outcome was higher in the frailer groups (27.8% in the low-frailty vs 31.5% in the intermediate-frailty vs 37.9% in the high-frailty group; P = 0.008). All groups showed comparable rates of cardiovascular death, stroke, or bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI is clinically viable and cost-saving treatment option for frail patients with severe aortic stenosis.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at increased risk of not only bleeding, but also ischaemic events. This study aimed to determine the long-term relative risk of ischaemic and bleeding events in HBR patients. METHODS: This study was a nationwide cohort study, based on the Korean National Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. Patients diagnosed with stable angina or acute coronary syndrome and those who underwent PCI in Korea between 2009 and 2018 were included in the analysis. According to the Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria, the total population was divided into HBR and non-HBR groups. The co-primary outcomes were major bleeding events and ischaemic (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischaemic stroke) events. RESULTS: Among a total of 325 417 patients who underwent PCI, 66 426 patients (20.4%) had HBR. During the follow-up period, HBR patients had a higher risk for major bleeding events (23.9% vs. 8.9%, P < .001) and ischaemic events (33.8% vs. 14.4%, P < .001). However, the impact of HBR was significant for major bleeding events [hazard ratio (HR) 3.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.04-3.21, P < .001] and for ischaemic events (HR 2.50, 95% CI 2.45-2.56, P < .001). The HBR group was also associated with a greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR 3.73, 95% CI 3.66-3.79, P < .001). The average annual rate of major bleeding events within the first year after PCI was 5.5% for a single major criterion, and 2.9% for a single minor criterion. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing PCI, those with HBR were at increased long-term risk for both bleeding and ischaemic events, with a greater risk of mortality compared to non-HBR patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The clinical benefits of complete revascularization (CR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients are unclear. Moreover, the benefit of CR is unknown in AMI with diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. We sought to compare the prognosis of CR and incomplete revascularization (IR) in patients with AMI and multivessel disease, according to the presence of DM. METHODS: A total of 2,150 AMI patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were analyzed. CR was defined based on the angiographic image. The primary endpoint of this study was the patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO) defined as a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, and any revascularization within 3 years. RESULTS: Overall, 3-year POCO was significantly lower in patients receiving angiographic CR (985 patients, 45.8%) compared with IR (1,165 patients, 54.2%). When divided into subgroups according to the presence of DM, CR reduced 3-year clinical outcomes in the non-DM group but not in the DM group (POCO: 11.7% vs. 23.2%, p<0.001, any revascularization: 7.2% vs. 10.8%, p=0.024 in the non-DM group, POCO: 24.3% vs. 27.8%, p=0.295, any revascularization: 13.3% vs. 11.3%, p=0.448 in the DM group, for CR vs. IR). Multivariate analysis showed that CR significantly reduced 3-year POCO (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.75) only in the non-DM group. CONCLUSIONS: In AMI patients with multivessel disease, CR may have less clinical benefit in DM patients than in non-DM patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up is essential to evaluate the impact of polymer degradation in drug-eluting stents (DES). AIMS: We aimed to compare durable-polymer DES (DP-DES) and biodegradable-polymer DES (BP-DES) during a 3-year follow-up to evaluate the entire period of polymer resolution (before, during, and after degradation). METHODS: The HOST REDUCE POLYTECH RCT Trial was a randomised clinical trial enrolling patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and comparing the efficacy and safety of DP-DES and BP-DES. The primary outcome was a patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), and the key secondary outcome was a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO). RESULTS: A total of 3,413 ACS patients were randomised to either the DP-DES (1,713 patients) or BP-DES (1,700 patients) group. During the 3-year follow-up, the risk of the POCO was similar between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (14.8% vs 15.4%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-1.14; p=0.613). However, the risk of the DOCO was lower in the DP-DES group (6.0% vs 8.0%, HR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.95; p=0.020). In a landmark analysis, the lower risk of the DOCO for the DP-DES group was evident during the transition from the early to the late period after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (from 8 to 16 months post-PCI; 1.8% vs 3.3%, HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.84; p=0.007), which was mainly driven by a risk reduction of target lesion revascularisation. CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients, DP-DES showed similar results to BP-DES regarding the POCO up to 3 years. For the DOCO, DP-DES were superior to BP-DES; this was due to the higher event rate during the period of polymer degradation.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Polímeros , Humanos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diseño de Prótesis , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of each third-generation drug-eluting stent with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology remain unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or Orsiro biodegradable polymer SES. METHODS: The HOST-IDEA trial (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Coronary Intervention With Next-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms and Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), initially designed with a 2×2 factorial approach, sought to randomize patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention based on dual antiplatelet therapy duration (3 versus 12 months) and stent type (Coroflex ISAR versus Orsiro). Despite randomizing 2013 patients for dual antiplatelet therapy duration, the stent arm transitioned to a registry format during the trial. Among these, 328 individuals (16.3%) were randomized for Coroflex ISAR or Orsiro SES, while 1685 (83.7%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without stent-type randomization. In this study, the Coroflex ISAR (n=559) and Orsiro groups (n=1449) were matched using a propensity score. The prespecified primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months. RESULTS: The baseline patient and procedural characteristics were well balanced between the Coroflex ISAR and Orsiro groups after propensity score matching (n=559, each group). The Coroflex ISAR group was significantly associated with a higher rate of target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, compared with the Orsiro group (3.4% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.28-8.05]; P=0.01). A higher risk of target lesion failure in the Coroflex ISAR group was consistently observed across various subgroups. The rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.51-1.40]; P=0.52) and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.61-4.08]; P=0.34) were comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity score-matched analysis of the stent arm registry from the HOST-IDEA trial, the Orsiro SES was associated with significantly better outcomes in terms of 1-year target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, than the Coroflex ISAR SES. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria , Polímeros , Diseño de Prótesis , Sistema de Registros , Sirolimus , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Tiempo , Polímeros/química , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Factores de Riesgo , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificación , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Terapia Antiplaquetaria Doble , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Medición de Riesgo , Estenosis Coronaria/terapia , Estenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis Coronaria/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Infarto del Miocardio/etiologíaRESUMEN
Background: Hypertension and dyslipidemia significantly contribute to cardiovascular disease development. Their coexistence poses challenges in managing multiple medications, influencing treatment adherence. Objective: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a combined treatment approach using a fixed-dose combination therapy. Methods: This multicenter, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, Phase IV trial was named Telmisartan/Amlodipine/Rosuvastatin from Samjin Pharmaceuticals and evaluated the efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination treatment in patients with essential hypertension and dyslipidemia. They were randomly assigned to 2 fixed-dose combination therapy groups, telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/rosuvastatin 10 mg (TEL/ALD/RSV) or amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 10 mg (ALD/ATV) after washout/run-in period. The primary outcomes were the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure and the percentage change of LDL-C after 8 weeks of medical treatment. Adverse drug reactions and events were assessed. Results: Of a total of 304 patients who underwent screening, 252 were randomized to the TEL/ALD/RSV group (125 patients) and the ALD/ATV group (127 patients). The mean (SD) ages of the TEL/ALD/RSV group and the ALD/ATV group were 67.4 (11.3) and 68.2 (10.6) years, respectively (Pâ¯=â¯0.563). The least-squares mean (SE) in mean sitting systolic blood pressure changes between the 2 groups were -16.27 (0.93) mm Hg in the TEL/ALD/RSV group, -6.85 (0.92) mm Hg in the ALD/ATV group (LSM differenceâ¯=â¯-9.42 mm Hg; 95% CI, -11.99 to -6.84; P < .001). For LDL-C level changes, a significant difference was noted between the 2 groups: -50.03% (1.18%) in the TEL/ALD/RSV group, -39.60% (1.17%) in the ALD/ATV group (LSM differenceâ¯=â¯-10.43%; 95% CI, -13.70 to -7.16; P < .001). No severe adverse events were observed. Conclusions: TEL/ALD/RSV proved to be more efficient than ALD/ATV in lowering blood pressure and reducing LDL-C levels among patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia, with no notable safety concerns. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2024; XX:XXX-XXX). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03860220.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUNDS: The HOST-EXAM Extended study reported the benefit of clopidogrel monotherapy over aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This age-specific subgroup analysis of the study aimed to assess the impact of age on antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI. METHODS: We analysed data from the per-protocol population (4717 patients) with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. The old age group comprised 2033 patients (43.1%), defined as those 65 years of age or older. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type 3 or greater. The secondary end points were thrombotic composite outcomes and any bleeding. RESULTS: Age correlated with an elevated risk of adverse events, particularly from age 65. Clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with a reduction of the primary end point in both the old age group (19.4% vs 23.1%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.802, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.664-0.968; P = 0.022) and the young age group (7.8% vs 11.7%, HR 0.646, 95% CI 0.506-0.825; P < 0.001), without significant interaction (interaction P = 0.167). These findings were consistent for the secondary composite thrombotic end point and any bleeding events (interaction P value of secondary thrombotic end point: 0.786; interaction P value of any bleeding end point: 0.565). Consistent results were observed in analyses with a 75-year age cutoff and in subgroup analyses by 10-year age intervals. CONCLUSIONS: In patients requiring antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI, occurrence of both ischemic and bleeding events dramatically increased from age 65. The beneficial impact of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02044250.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Anciano , Clopidogrel/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Aspirina/uso terapéutico , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Hemorragia/tratamiento farmacológico , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/cirugía , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol-lowering treatment is beneficial for the secondary or primary prevention of high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, the prognostic implications of low LDL cholesterol levels in patients without previous ASCVD and without statin use remain elusive. METHODS: From a nationwide cohort, 2,432,471 participants without previous ASCVD or statin use were included. For myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemic stroke (IS), participants were followed-up from 2009 to 2018. They were stratified according to 10-year ASCVD risk (<5 %, 5 %-<7.5 %, 7.5 %-<20 %, and ≥20 %) and LDL cholesterol level (<70, 70-99, 100-129, 130-159, 160-189, and ≥190 mg/dL). RESULTS: The relationship between LDL cholesterol levels and ASCVD events exhibited a J-shaped curve for both MI and IS. After classification according to the ASCVD risk, this J-shaped relationship was consistently observed for the composite of MI and IS. Participants with an LDL cholesterol level <70 mg/dL showed a higher MI risk than those with a level of 70-99 mg/dL or 100-129 mg/dL in the low-ASCVD risk group. The J-shaped curve between LDL cholesterol levels and MI risk was attenuated across ASCVD risk groups. For IS, participants with an LDL cholesterol level <70 mg/dL demonstrated increased risks compared with those with a level of 70-99 mg/dL, 100-129 mg/dL, or 130-159 mg/dL in the borderline, intermediate, and high ASCVD risk groups, respectively. In contrast, a linear association was observed in participants taking statins. Interestingly, a J-shaped association was observed between LDL cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels; the mean hs-CRP level and the proportion of individuals with increased hs-CRP levels were relatively high among individuals with an LDL cholesterol level <70 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: Although high LDL cholesterol levels increase the risk of ASCVD, low LDL cholesterol levels do not warrant safety from ASCVD. Therefore, individuals with low LDL cholesterol levels should be carefully monitored.
Asunto(s)
Aterosclerosis , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas , Infarto del Miocardio , Humanos , LDL-Colesterol , Proteína C-Reactiva , Aterosclerosis/prevención & control , Factores de Riesgo , Prevención PrimariaRESUMEN
AIMS: Evidence for the effectiveness of left ventricular (LV) unloading in patients who received venoaterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or non-AMI induced cardiogenic shock (CS) is limited. The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of LV unloading in AMI-induced and non-AMI-induced CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a single-centre retrospective observational study of patients with CS undergoing VA-ECMO from January 2011 to March 2019. Patients were classified as AMI-induced and non-AMI-induced CS. The association of LV unloading with 90-day mortality in both groups was analysed using Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 128 CS patients, 71 (55.5%) patients received VA-ECMO due to AMI-induced CS, and the remaining 57 (44.5%) received VA-ECMO due to non-AMI-induced CS. The modality of LV unloading was predominantly with IABP (94.5%). In the AMI-induced CS group, LV unloading did not reduce 90-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.96, 95% confidence interval 0.90-4.27, P = 0.089). However, in the non-AMI-induced CS group, LV unloading combined with VA-ECMO significantly reduced 90-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.96, P = 0.041; P for interaction = 0.029) as compared with those who received VA-ECMO alone. CONCLUSIONS: LV unloading with VA-ECMO may reduce 90-day mortality compared with VA-ECMO alone in patients with non-AMI-induced CS, but not in AMI-induced CS.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Infarto del Miocardio , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/etiología , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Ventrículos Cardíacos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel was superior to aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefits of clopidogrel across high-risk subgroups METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the HOST-EXAM (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery diseases-EXtended Antiplatelet Monotherapy) trial that randomly assigned patients who were event free for 6 to 18 months post-PCI on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to clopidogrel or aspirin monotherapy. Two clinical risk scores were used for risk stratification: the DAPT score and the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS 2°P) (the sum of age ≥75 years, diabetes, hypertension, current smoking, peripheral artery disease, stroke, coronary artery bypass grafting, heart failure, and renal dysfunction). The primary composite endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission because of acute coronary syndrome, and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type ≥3) at 2 years after randomization. RESULTS: Among 5,403 patients, clopidogrel monotherapy showed a lower rate of the primary composite endpoint than aspirin monotherapy (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.90). The benefit of clopidogrel over aspirin was consistent regardless of TRS 2°P (high TRS 2°P [≥3] group: HR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.44-0.96]; and low TRS 2°P [<3] group: HR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.60-0.99]) (P for interaction = 0.454) and regardless of DAPT score (high DAPT score [≥2] group: HR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.46-1.00]; and low DAPT score [<2] group: HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.59-0.96]) (P for interaction = 0.662). The association was similar for the individual outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effect of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of clinical risk or relative ischemic and bleeding risks compared with aspirin monotherapy. (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis- EXtended Antiplatelet Monotherapy [HOST-EXAM]; NCT02044250).
Asunto(s)
Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Anciano , Clopidogrel/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Aspirina/efectos adversos , Infarto del Miocardio/complicaciones , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Hemorragia/complicaciones , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: It is still unclear the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) in complex coronary lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which themselves are at increased incidence of adverse events. METHODS: BIFURCAT registry encompassed patients treated with PCI for coronary bifurcation lesion from the COBIS III and the RAIN registry. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major cardiovascular adverse event (MACE), a composite and mutual exclusive of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI) or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). A total of 5537 patients were included in the analysis and 1834 (33%) suffered from DM. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 21 months, diabetic patients had a higher incidence of MACE (17% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), all-cause mortality (9% vs. 4%, p < 0.001), TLR (5% vs. 3%, p = 0.001), MI (4% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis (ST) (2% vs. 1%, p = 0.007). After multivariate analysis, diabetes remained significantly associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-1.65; p = 0.001), all-cause death (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.24-2.19, p = 0.001), TLR (HR: 1.45; CI: 1.03-2.04; p = 0.031) and ST (HR: 1.73, CI: 1.04-2.88; p = 0.036), but not with MI (HR: 1.34; CI: 0.93-1.92; p = 0.11). Among diabetics, chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.99; CI: 2.21-4.04), baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (HR: 0.98; CI: 0.97-0.99), femoral access (HR: 1.62; CI: 1.23-2.15), left main coronary artery (HR: 1.44; CI: 1.06-1.94), main branch diameter (HR: 0.79; CI: 0.66-0.94) and final kissing balloon (HR: 0.70; CI: 0.52-0.93) were independent predictors of MACE at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DM treated with PCI for coronary bifurcations have a worse prognosis due to higher incidence of MACE, all-cause mortality, TLR and ST compared to the non-diabetics.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Volumen Sistólico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Riesgo , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Sistema de Registros , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aspirin is the only antiplatelet agent with a Class I recommendation for long-term prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). There is inconsistent evidence on how it compares with alternative antiplatelet agents. OBJECTIVES: This study compared P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs aspirin in patients with CAD. METHODS: We conducted a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs aspirin monotherapy for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with established CAD. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Prespecified key secondary outcomes were major bleeding and net adverse clinical events (the composite of the primary outcome and major bleeding). Data were pooled in a 1-step meta-analysis. RESULTS: Patient-level data were obtained from 7 trials. Overall, 24,325 participants were available for analysis, including 12,178 patients assigned to receive P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (clopidogrel in 7,545 [62.0%], ticagrelor in 4,633 [38.0%]) and 12,147 assigned to receive aspirin. Risk of the primary outcome was lower with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy compared with aspirin over 2 years (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79-0.97; P = 0.012), mainly owing to less myocardial infarction (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.66-0.90; P < 0.001). Major bleeding was similar (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70-1.09; P = 0.23) and net adverse clinical events were lower (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.81-0.98; P = 0.020) with P2Y12 inhibitors. The treatment effect was consistent across prespecified subgroups and types of P2Y12 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Given its superior efficacy and similar overall safety, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy might be preferred over aspirin monotherapy for long-term secondary prevention in patients with established CAD. (P2Y12 Inhibitor or Aspirin Monotherapy as Secondary Prevention in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials [PANTHER collaborative initiative]; CRD42021290774).
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Aspirina , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/prevención & control , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/inducido químicamente , Prevención Secundaria , Antagonistas del Receptor Purinérgico P2Y , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Hemorragia/etiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background: The HOST-EXAM (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease-Extended Antiplatelet Monotherapy) trial showed superior efficacy and safety of clopidogrel monotherapy compared with aspirin monotherapy during the chronic maintenance period after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: The goal of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel monotherapy compared with that of aspirin monotherapy. Methods: A Markov model was developed for patients in the stable phase after PCI. From the perspectives of the South Korean, UK, and U.S. health care systems, the lifetime health care costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of each strategy were estimated. Transition probabilities were obtained from the HOST-EXAM trial, and health care costs and health-related utilities were obtained from data and literature for each country. Results: From the perspective of the South Korean health care system, the base-case analysis showed that clopidogrel monotherapy was $3,192 higher in lifetime health care costs and 0.139 lower in QALYs compared with aspirin. This result was greatly influenced by the numerically but insignificantly higher cardiovascular mortality of clopidogrel compared with aspirin. In the analogous UK and U.S. models, clopidogrel monotherapy was projected to decrease health care costs by £1,122 and $8,920 per patient compared with aspirin monotherapy while reducing QALYs by 0.103 and 0.175, respectively. Conclusions: Based on empirical data from the HOST-EXAM trial, clopidogrel monotherapy was projected to lead to reduced QALYs compared with aspirin during the chronic maintenance period after PCI. These results were affected by a numerically higher rate of cardiovascular mortality in clopidogrel monotherapy reported from the HOST-EXAM trial. (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Extended Antiplatelet Monotherapy [HOST-EXAM]; NCT02044250).
RESUMEN
Background Clopidogrel monotherapy was more effective in reducing the risk of adverse clinical events than aspirin monotherapy in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES), according to the HOST-EXAM (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Extended Antiplatelet Monotherapy) trial. However, it remains unknown whether these effects differ based on sex. Methods and Results This was a prespecified secondary analysis of HOST-EXAM in South Korea. Patients who maintained dual antiplatelet therapy without adverse clinical events for 6 to 18 months after PCI with DES were included. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, acute coronary syndrome, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type ≥3 at 24 months after randomization. The bleeding end point was BARC types 2 to 5. The primary end point was comparable between the sexes (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.02]; P=0.067), and the bleeding end point (adjusted HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.54-1.17]; P=0.240) was also similar. Compared with aspirin, clopidogrel was associated with lower risk of primary composite end point (adjusted HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.89]; P=0.004) and bleeding end point (adjusted HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.44-0.96]; P=0.031) in men but not in women. Conclusions The primary composite end point and bleeding events were comparable between the sexes during chronic maintenance antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI with DES. Clopidogrel monotherapy, compared with aspirin, significantly reduced the risk of the primary composite end point and bleeding events in men. However, the beneficial effect of clopidogrel on the primary end point and bleeding events was mitigated in women. Registration Information clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT02044250.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Clopidogrel/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/efectos adversos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Aspirina/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Importance: Selecting the optimal antiplatelet agent in patients who have received percutaneous coronary intervention is especially important in those with diabetes due to the heightened risk of ischemic events in this population. Studies on the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel vs aspirin for long-term maintenance after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes are lacking. Objective: To investigate cardiovascular outcomes with clopidogrel vs aspirin in patients with and without diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a post hoc analysis of the HOST-EXAM randomized clinical trial, an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial performed at 37 centers in Korea. Patients who received dual antiplatelet therapy without clinical events for 6 to 18 months after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents were enrolled from March 2014 to May 2018 with follow-up at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. All 5438 patients in the original trial were included in this analysis, which was conducted from June to October 2021. Interventions and Exposures: Enrolled patients were randomized 1:1 to clopidogrel or aspirin monotherapy. Subgroup analyses were performed by the presence of diabetes. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was primary composite end point of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5) at 24-month follow-up. Results: Of 5438 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.5 [10.7] years; 1384 [25.5%] female), 1860 (34.2%) had diabetes (925 in the clopidogrel arm and 935 in the aspirin arm), and 5338 (98.2%) completed follow-up. The rate of the primary composite end point was significantly lower in the clopidogrel group compared to the aspirin group in patients with diabetes (6.3% vs 9.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = .03; absolute risk difference [ARD], 2.7%; number needed to treat [NNT], 37) and without diabetes (5.3% vs 7.0%; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-1.00; P = .046; ARD, 1.6%, NNT, 63; P for interaction = .65). The presence of diabetes was not associated with a difference in benefit observed with clopidogrel monotherapy over aspirin for the thrombotic composite end point (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.04 for patients with diabetes vs HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.93 for those without; P for interaction = .99) and any bleeding with Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39-1.09 for patients with diabetes vs HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.48-1.13 for those without; P for interaction = .71). Conclusion and Relevance: In this study, clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with a lower rate of the primary composite end point compared to aspirin monotherapy as long-term maintenance therapy after dual antiplatelet therapy for coronary stenting in both patients with and without diabetes. Clopidogrel might thus be considered rather than aspirin in patients who have undergone coronary stenting and successfully completed dual antiplatelet therapy, regardless of diabetes status. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02044250.
Asunto(s)
Aspirina , Diabetes Mellitus , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Clopidogrel/uso terapéutico , Aspirina/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Estudios Prospectivos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention using third-generation drug-eluting stents with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology. We investigated whether 3- to 6-month DAPT was noninferior to 12-month DAPT after implantation of drug-eluting stents with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology. METHODS: We performed an open-label, randomized trial at 37 centers in South Korea. We enrolled patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention using the Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents. Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 3- to 6-month or 12-month DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention. The choice of antiplatelet medications was at the physician's discretion. The primary outcome was a net adverse clinical event, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, or major bleeding, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 at 12 months. The major secondary outcomes were target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and major bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 2013 patients (mean age, 65.7±10.5 years; 1487 males [73.9%]; 1110 [55.1%] presented with acute coronary syndrome) were randomly assigned to 3- to 6-month DAPT (n=1002) or 12-month DAPT (n=1011). The primary outcome occurred in 37 (3.7%) patients in the 3- to 6-month DAPT group and 41 (4.1%) in the 12-month DAPT group. The noninferiority of the 3- to 6-month DAPT group to the 12-month DAPT group was met (absolute risk difference, -0.4% [1-sided 95% CI, -∞% to 1.1%]; P<0.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant differences in target lesion failure (hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.56-1.71], P=0.94) or major bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.41-1.61], P=0.56) between the 2 groups. Across various subgroups, the treatment effect of 3- to 6-month DAPT was consistent for net adverse clinical event. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention using third-generation drug-eluting stents, 3- to 6-month DAPT was noninferior to 12-month DAPT for net adverse clinical event. Further research is needed to generalize this finding to other populations and to determine the ideal regimen for 3- to 6-month DAPT. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.
Asunto(s)
Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Masculino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Infarto del Miocardio/tratamiento farmacológico , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Sirolimus , Muerte , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background: Patients with coronary artery disease and impaired renal function are at higher risk for both bleeding and ischemic adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of a prasugrel-based de-escalation strategy in patients with impaired renal function. Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS study. Patients with available estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (n = 2,311) were categorized into 3 groups. (high eGFR: >90 mL/min; intermediate eGFR: 60 to 90 mL/min; and low eGFR: <60 mL/min). The end points were bleeding outcomes (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher), ischemic outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, repeated revascularization, and ischemic stroke), and net adverse clinical event (including any clinical event) at 1-year follow-up. Results: Prasugrel de-escalation was beneficial regardless of baseline renal function (P for interaction = 0.508). The relative reduction in bleeding risk from prasugrel de-escalation was higher in the low eGFR group than in both the intermediate and high eGFR groups (relative reductions, respectively: 64% (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.15-0.83) vs 50% (HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.90) and 52% (HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.21-1.13) (P for interaction = 0.646). Ischemic risk from prasgurel de-escalation was not significant in all eGFR groups (HR: 1.18 [95% CI: 0.47-2.98], HR: 0.95 [95% CI: 0.53-1.69], and HR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.26-1.39]) (P for interaction = 0.119). Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving PCI, prasugrel dose de-escalation was beneficial regardless of the baseline renal function.