Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 427
Filtrar
1.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 8(19): e013463, 2019 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31549579

RESUMO

Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for many patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and relies on accurate sizing of the aortic annulus. It has been suggested that 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D TEE) may be used instead of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for TAVR planning. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared 3D TEE and MDCT for pre-TAVR measurements. Methods and Results A systematic literature search was performed. The primary outcome was the correlation coefficient between 3D TEE- and MDCT-measured annular area. Secondary outcomes were correlation coefficients for mean annular diameter, annular perimeter, and left ventricular outflow tract area; interobserver and intraobserver agreements; mean differences between 3D TEE and MDCT measurements; and pooled sensitivities, specificities, and receiver operating characteristic area under curve values of 3D TEE and MDCT for discriminating post-TAVR paravalvular aortic regurgitation. A random effects model was used. Meta-regression and leave-one-out analysis for the primary outcome were performed. Nineteen studies with a total of 1599 patients were included. Correlations between 3D TEE and MDCT annular area, annular perimeter, annular diameter, and left ventricular outflow tract area measurements were strong (0.86 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]; 0.89 [CI, 0.82-0.93]; 0.80 [CI, 0.70-0.87]; and 0.78 [CI, 0.61-0.88], respectively). Mean differences between 3D TEE and MDCT between measurements were small and nonsignificant. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement and discriminatory abilities for paravalvular aortic regurgitation were good for both 3D TEE and MDCT. Conclusions For pre-TAVR planning, 3D TEE is comparable to MDCT. In patients with renal dysfunction, 3D TEE may be potentially advantageous for TAVR measurements because of the lack of contrast exposure.

2.
JAMA Cardiol ; 2019 Sep 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31557763

RESUMO

Importance: The role of aspirin as part of antiplatelet regimens in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) needs to be clarified in the context of newer potent P2Y12 antagonists. Objective: To evaluate the benefit and risks of aspirin in addition to ticagrelor among patients with ACS beyond 1 month after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a nonprespecified, post hoc analysis of GLOBAL LEADERS, a randomized, open-label superiority trial comparing 2 antiplatelet treatment strategies after PCI. The trial included 130 secondary/tertiary care hospitals in different countries, with 15 991 unselected patients with stable coronary artery disease or ACS undergoing PCI. Patients had outpatient visits at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after index procedure. Interventions: The experimental group received aspirin plus ticagrelor for 1 month followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy; the reference group received aspirin plus either clopidogrel (stable coronary artery disease) or ticagrelor (ACS) for 12 months, followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy. In this analysis, we examined the clinical outcomes occurring between 31 days and 365 days after randomization, specifically in patients with ACS who, within this time frame, were assigned to receive either ticagrelor alone or ticagrelor and aspirin. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction. Results: Of 15 968 participants, there were 7487 patients with ACS enrolled; 3750 patients were assigned to the experimental group and 3737 patients to the reference group. Between 31 and 365 days after randomization, the primary outcome occurred in 55 patients (1.5%) in the experimental group and in 75 patients (2.0%) in the reference group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.51-1.03; P = .07); investigator-reported Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-defined bleeding type 3 or 5 occurred in 28 patients (0.8%) in the experimental group and in 54 patients (1.5%) in the reference arm (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.81; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: Between 1 month and 12 months after PCI in ACS, aspirin was associated with increased bleeding risk and appeared not to add to the benefit of ticagrelor on ischemic events. These findings should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis generating; however, they pave the way for further trials evaluating aspirin-free antiplatelet strategies after PCI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01813435.

4.
N Engl J Med ; 2019 Sep 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31475799

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The relative merits of ticagrelor as compared with prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom invasive evaluation is planned are uncertain. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes and for whom invasive evaluation was planned to receive either ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year. A major secondary end point (the safety end point) was bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4018 patients underwent randomization. A primary-end point event occurred in 184 of 2012 patients (9.3%) in the ticagrelor group and in 137 of 2006 patients (6.9%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.70; P = 0.006). The respective incidences of the individual components of the primary end point in the ticagrelor group and the prasugrel group were as follows: death, 4.5% and 3.7%; myocardial infarction, 4.8% and 3.0%; and stroke, 1.1% and 1.0%. Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 1.3% of patients assigned to ticagrelor and 1.0% of patients assigned to prasugrel, and definite stent thrombosis occurred in 1.1% and 0.6%, respectively. Major bleeding (as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium scale) was observed in 5.4% of patients in the ticagrelor group and in 4.8% of patients in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.51; P = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation, the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was significantly lower among those who received prasugrel than among those who received ticagrelor, and the incidence of major bleeding was not significantly different between the two groups. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and Deutsches Herzzentrum München; ISAR-REACT 5 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01944800.).

5.
N Engl J Med ; 2019 Sep 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31556978

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor after a minimum period of dual antiplatelet therapy is an emerging approach to reduce the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: In a double-blind trial, we examined the effect of ticagrelor alone as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin with regard to clinically relevant bleeding among patients who were at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event and had undergone PCI. After 3 months of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients who had not had a major bleeding event or ischemic event continued to take ticagrelor and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. We also evaluated the composite end point of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, using a noninferiority hypothesis with an absolute margin of 1.6 percentage points. RESULTS: We enrolled 9006 patients, and 7119 underwent randomization after 3 months. Between randomization and 1 year, the incidence of the primary end point was 4.0% among patients randomly assigned to receive ticagrelor plus placebo and 7.1% among patients assigned to receive ticagrelor plus aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.68; P<0.001). The difference in risk between the groups was similar for BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (incidence, 1.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus placebo and 2.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus aspirin; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74). The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (difference, -0.06 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.97 to 0.84; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.25; P<0.001 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients who underwent PCI and completed 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy, ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower incidence of clinically relevant bleeding than ticagrelor plus aspirin, with no higher risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by AstraZeneca; TWILIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02270242.).

8.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther ; 17(9): 633-643, 2019 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31382819

RESUMO

Introduction: While the clinical merits of aspirin in secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention remain undisputed, its role in primary prevention is controversial. Recently, three trials of primary prevention reported neutral net benefit results or evidence of harm for aspirin in patients with no overt CVD. Areas covered: This article aims to inform clinical practitioners by appraising the current body of evidence on the use of aspirin for primary CVD prevention, ranging from general pharmacology to clinical outcomes and future directions. Expert opinion: Based on meta-analyses incorporating latest trials in the field of primary prevention, the modest reduction in ischemic events with aspirin, if any, is offset by a modest increase in nonfatal bleeding. Improved control of CVD risk factors and broader use of statins may have reduced the thrombotic complications of atherosclerosis, thus limiting the opportunity for aspirin to prevent clinical CVD events in the contemporary era. As such, decision-making about aspirin for primary prevention is challenging even when selected patients are considered and involves careful weighing of risks and benefits. Ongoing investigations conducted in patients with cancer could rapidly modify the current perception of the unfavorable benefit-risk ratio of aspirin in patients with no overt CVD.

9.
Interv Cardiol Clin ; 8(4): 321-340, 2019 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31445718

RESUMO

Several platelet P2Y12 inhibiting agents, both oral and intravenous, are available for clinical use. The oral P2Y12 inhibitors comprise clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor. Cangrelor is the only intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor. Numerous pharmacodynamic studies have been performed to assess the impact of P2Y12 inhibitor switching on platelet reactivity profiles and to define the optimal strategy if switching is needed, with the goal of minimizing the risk of having inadequate platelet inhibition due to potential drug-drug interactions occurring during the drug overlap phase. This article provides an overview of pharmacodynamic studies assessing switching between P2Y12 inhibitors and recommendations on switching modalities based on these findings.

10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31420787

RESUMO

Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid, ASA) can lead to gastrointestinal mucosal injury through disruption of its protective phospholipid bilayer. A liquid formulation of a novel pharmaceutical lipid-aspirin complex (PL-ASA) was designed to prevent this disruption. We sought to determine the pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics of PL-ASA compared with immediate release aspirin (IR-ASA). In this active-control crossover study, 32 healthy volunteers were randomized to receive 1 of 2 dose levels (a single dose of 325 mg or 650 mg) of either PL-ASA or IR-ASA. After a 2-week washout period between treatment assignments, subjects received a single dose of the alternative treatment, at the same dose level. The primary objectives of the study were to assess, for PL-ASA and IR-ASA at 325 mg and 650 mg dose levels, PK and PD bioequivalence, and safety, over a 24-h period after administration of both drugs. PK parameters were similar for PL-ASA and IR-ASA, and met FDA-criteria for bioequivalence. Regarding PD, both drugs also showed Cmin TxB2 values below 3.1 ng/mL (cut-off associated with decreased cardiovascular events) and > 99% inhibition of serum TxB2 ( ≥ 95% inhibition represents the cut-off for aspirin responders) along with similar results in several secondary PK/PD parameters. There were no serious adverse events or changes from baseline in vital signs or laboratory values in either of the 2 treatment groups. PL-ASA's novel liquid formulation has similar PK and PD performance compared with IR-ASA, supporting functional and clinical equivalence. These data coupled with the improved gastric safety of PL-ASA suggest that this novel formulation may exhibit an improved benefit-risk profile, warranting evaluation in future trials.Clinical trial registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT04008979.

11.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 12(16): 1538-1549, 2019 Aug 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31377269

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess if intravenous methylnaltrexone can counteract the effects of morphine on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of ticagrelor. BACKGROUND: Morphine delays the onset of action of oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, including ticagrelor, by inhibiting gastric emptying and leading to delayed drug absorption. Methylnaltrexone is a peripheral opioid receptor antagonist that has the potential to prevent opioid-induced peripherally mediated side effects (e.g., gastric emptying inhibition) without affecting analgesia. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, aspirin-treated patients with stable coronary artery disease (n = 30) were randomized to receive methylnaltrexone (0.3 mg/kg intravenous) or matching placebo. After methylnaltrexone or placebo administration, all patients received morphine (5 mg intravenous). This was followed 15 min later by a 180-mg loading dose of ticagrelor. Patients crossed over to the alternative study treatment after 7 ± 2 days of washout. PK and PD assessments were performed at 12 time points (6 pre- and 6 post-crossover). PK analysis included measurement of plasma levels of ticagrelor and its major active metabolite (AR-C124910XX). PD assessments included VerifyNow P2Y12, light transmittance aggregometry, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein. RESULTS: Only marginal changes in plasma levels of ticagrelor (and its major active metabolite) were observed with ticagrelor: maximum plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to the last measurable concentration were 38% and 30% higher, respectively, in patients receiving methylnaltrexone compared with those receiving placebo, but no differences in time to maximum plasma concentration were observed. There were no differences in P2Y12 reaction units by VerifyNow P2Y12 between groups at each time point, including 2 h (the primary endpoint; p = 0.261). Similarly, there were no differences in PD markers assessed by light transmittance aggregometry and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coronary artery disease receiving morphine, intravenous administration of the peripheral opioid receptor antagonist methylnaltrexone leads to only marginal changes in plasma levels of ticagrelor and its major metabolite, without affecting levels of platelet reactivity. (Effect of Methylnaltrexone on the PK/PD Profiles of Ticagrelor in Patients Treated With Morphine; NCT02403830).

13.
Thromb Haemost ; 2019 Aug 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31470444

RESUMO

In patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) who also have an indication to be treated with oral anticoagulant (OAC) drugs, aspirin withdrawal reduces the risk of bleeding. There is limited data on the pharmacodynamic effects associated with adding a nonvitamin K antagonist OAC on a background of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor as well as dropping aspirin. Seventy-five patients on DAPT (aspirin plus clopidogrel) were randomized to DAPT plus high-dose edoxaban (60 mg once daily, Group A), DAPT plus low-dose edoxaban (30 mg once daily, Group B), or DAPT only (Group C) for 10 ± 2 days (Phase I). Afterwards, Groups A and B interrupted aspirin and maintained clopidogrel plus edoxaban for 10 ± 2 days, while patients in Group C maintained DAPT (Phase II). Platelet aggregation and clot kinetics were assessed at baseline, end of Phase I, and end of Phase II using thrombelastography (TEG), light transmittance aggregometry (LTA), VerifyNow P2Y12, and serum thromboxane-B2. The primary endpoint was the comparison of maximum amplitude (MA) measured by TEG, a measure of clot strength, between patients on DAPT plus high-dose edoxaban and patients on DAPT only. Edoxaban prolonged in a dose-dependent manner speed of thrombin generation (TEG R; Group A: 7.7 [6.8-8.7] vs. Group B: 7.4 [6.4-8.5] vs. Group C: 6.3 [5.7-7.0]; p = 0.05) but did not affect other markers of clot kinetics, including TEG MA (Group A: 63 [61-64] vs. Group B: 65 [63-67] vs. Group C: 64 [63-65]; p = 0.10). After aspirin discontinuation, platelet reactivity assessed by LTA using thrombin receptor activating peptide as agonist increased to a greater extent with low-dose edoxaban. Stopping aspirin did not affect markers of P2Y12 reactivity and had no or marginal effects on clot kinetics, but increased markers sensitive to cyclooxygenase-1 blockade.

15.
Eur. heart j ; 40(25)Jul. 1, 2019. ilus
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1009597

RESUMO

Non-adherence has been well recognized for years to be a common issue that significantly impacts clinical outcomes and health care costs. Medication adherence is remarkably low even in the controlled environment of clinical trials where it has potentially complex major implications. Collection of non-adherence data diverge markedly among cardiovascular randomized trials and, even where collected, is rarely incorporated in the statistical analysis to test the consistency of the primary endpoint(s). The imprecision introduced by the inconsistent assessment of non-adherence in clinical trials might confound the estimate of the calculated efficacy of the study drug. Hence, clinical trials may not accurately answer the scientific question posed by regulators, who seek an accurate estimate of the true efficacy and safety of treatment, or the question posed by payers, who want a reliable estimate of the effectiveness of treatment in the marketplace after approval. The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration among leading academic research organizations, representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and physician-scientists from the USA and Europe. One in-person meeting was held in Madrid, Spain, culminating in a document describing consensus recommendations for reporting, collecting, and analysing adherence endpoints across clinical trials. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation of investigational drugs from early development to post-marketing approval studies. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.(AU)


Assuntos
Adesão à Medicação
16.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 74(1): 83-99, 2019 Jul 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31272556

RESUMO

Most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and risk factors for stroke require oral anticoagulation (OAC) to decrease the risk of stroke or systemic embolism. This is now best achieved with direct oral anticoagulants that decrease the risk of intracranial bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonists. Of note, approximately 5% to 10% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have AF, which complicates antithrombotic therapy in daily practice, because the guidelines recommend that these patients also receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of ischemic complications. However, combining OAC with DAPT, a strategy also known as triple antithrombotic therapy, is known to increase the risk of bleeding compared with the use of OAC or DAPT alone. Studies of direct oral anticoagulants are now emerging that show the favorable safety profile of double antithrombotic therapy with OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor in comparison with triple antithrombotic therapy including the use of vitamin K antagonists. The scope of this review is to provide an update on this topic as well as to discuss future directions in the management of antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in AF patients requiring chronic OAC.

17.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 12(16): 1521-1537, 2019 Aug 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31202949

RESUMO

Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is the standard treatment for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The availability of different P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) with varying levels of potency has enabled physicians to contemplate individualized treatment regimens, which may include escalation or de-escalation of P2Y12-inhibiting therapy. Indeed, individualized and alternative DAPT strategies may be chosen according to the clinical setting (stable coronary artery disease vs. acute coronary syndrome), the stage of the disease (early- vs. long-term treatment), and patient risk for ischemic and bleeding complications. A tailored DAPT approach may be potentially guided by platelet function testing (PFT) or genetic testing. Although the routine use of PFT or genetic testing in percutaneous coronary intervention-treated patients is not recommended, recent data have led to an update in guideline recommendations that allow considering selective use of PFT for DAPT de-escalation. However, guidelines do not expand on when to implement the selective use of such assays into decision making for personalized treatment approaches. Therefore, an international expert consensus group of key leaders from North America, Asia, and Europe with expertise in the field of antiplatelet treatment was convened. This document updates 2 prior consensus papers on this topic and summarizes the contemporary updated expert consensus recommendations for the selective use of PFT or genotyping in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA