Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 211
Filtrar
1.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 15(8): 797-806, 2022 04 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35450679

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which the association between premature dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) discontinuation and excess risk of thrombotic events varies according to the reason and timing of DAPT discontinuation and whether high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) influences the risk of thrombotic events after premature DAPT discontinuation. BACKGROUND: DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) suppresses platelet reactivity, and HPR on clopidogrel after PCI is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events. METHODS: ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a prospective, multicenter registry of 8,582 patients successfully treated with coronary drug-eluting stents that assessed HPR on clopidogrel. For patients who discontinued aspirin or clopidogrel at any time during the study, the reasons for discontinuation were systematically categorized. RESULTS: Planned DAPT discontinuation occurred within 2 years in 3,203 (37.3%) patients. One thousand four hundred eighteen (16.5%) patients discontinued DAPT for unplanned reasons, including surgery or trauma (n = 768 [8.9%]), patient nonadherence (n = 321 [3.7%]), bleeding complications (n = 264 [3.1%]), and drug allergy or hypersensitivity (n = 113 [1.3%]). Unplanned but not planned DAPT discontinuation was associated with an increased risk of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE, defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis); with highest risk within 3 months after PCI (adjusted HR: 7.65, 95% CI: 2.77-21.10 vs adjusted HR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.70-3.58 for unplanned DAPT discontinuation ≥3 weeks after PCI). MACE risk after DAPT discontinuation was not moderated by HPR (Pinteraction = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In this large-scale all-comers registry, premature DAPT discontinuation for unplanned reasons occurred in approximately 1 of 6 patients after DES implantation and was associated with a markedly increased risk of MACEs. (Assessment of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy With Drug Eluting Stents [ADAPT-DES]; NCT00638794).


Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Clopidogrel/efeitos adversos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/tratamento farmacológico , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária , Estudos Prospectivos , Ticlopidina , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 15(7): 753-766, 2022 04 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35305904

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine correlates and consequences of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) on clinical outcomes in patients with or without pre-existing chronic kidney disease (CKD). BACKGROUND: The incidence and impact of CA-AKI on clinical outcomes during contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not fully defined. METHODS: The ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy With Drug Eluting Stents) study was a prospective, multicenter registry of 8,582 patients treated with ≥1 drug-eluting stent(s). CA-AKI was defined as a post-PCI increase in serum creatinine of >0.5 mg/dL or a relative increase of ≥25% compared with pre-PCI. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The primary endpoint was the 2-year rate of net adverse clinical events (NACE): All-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), definite or probable stent thrombosis, or major bleeding. RESULTS: Of 7287 (85%) patients with evaluable data, 476 (6.5%) developed CA-AKI. In a multivariable model, older age, female sex, Caucasian race, congestive heart failure, diabetes, hypertension, CKD, presentation with ST-segment elevation MI, Killip class II to IV, radial access, intra-aortic balloon pump use, hypotension, and number of stents were independent predictors of CA-AKI. The 2-year NACE rate was higher in patients with CA-AKI (adjusted HR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.42-2.49), as was each component of NACE (all-cause mortality, HR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.22-2.55; MI, HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.18-2.36; definite/probable stent thrombosis, HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.10-2.65; and major bleeding, HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.06-1.80). Compared with the CA-AKI-/CKD- group, the CA-AKI+/CKD- (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.33-2.52), CA-AKI-/CKD+ (HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15-2.13), CA-AKI+/CKD+ (HR: 3.29; 95% CI: 1.92-5.67), and maintenance dialysis (HR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.65-4.31) groups were at higher risk of NACE. CONCLUSIONS: CA-AKI was relatively common after contemporary PCI and was associated with increased 2-year rates of NACE. Patients with pre-existing CKD were at particularly high risk for NACE after CA-AKI.


Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda , Stents Farmacológicos , Infarto do Miocárdio , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Trombose , Injúria Renal Aguda/induzido quimicamente , Injúria Renal Aguda/diagnóstico , Injúria Renal Aguda/epidemiologia , Meios de Contraste/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/complicações , Fatores de Risco , Trombose/etiologia , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35325085

RESUMO

AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the treatment effects of ticagrelor monotherapy in the very high-risk cohort of patients with concomitant diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the TWILIGHT trial, after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and aspirin post-PCI, event-free patients were randomized to either aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor for 12 months. Those with available information on DM and CKD status were included in this subanalysis and were stratified by the presence or absence of either condition: 3391 (54.1%) had neither DM nor CKD (DM-/CKD-), 1822 (29.0%) had DM only (DM+/CKD-), 561 (8.9%) had CKD only (DM-/CKD+), and 8.0% had both DM and CKD (DM+/CKD+). The incidence of the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding did not differ according to DM/CKD status (p-trend = 0.13), but there was a significant increase in BARC 3 or 5 bleeding (p-trend<0.001) as well as the key secondary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (p-trend<0.001). Ticagrelor plus placebo reduced bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin across all four groups, including DM+/CKD+ patients with respect to BARC 2-5 (4.5% vs. 8.7%; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-1.01) as well as BARC 3-5 (0.8% vs. 5.3%; HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.53) bleeding, with no evidence of heterogeneity. The risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was similar between treatment arms across all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of the presence of DM, CKD, and their combination, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the risk of bleeding without a significant increase in ischemic events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.

4.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35191982

RESUMO

AIMS: To assess whether the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are influenced by preadmission treatment with aspirin and/or clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 4018) were categorized into 2 groups: preadmission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group (n = 1455), and no preadmission aspirin or clopidogrel group (n = 2563). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year.Patients in the preadmission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group had a higher risk of ischemic events, but a similar risk of bleeding with patients in the no preadmission aspirin or clopidogrel group (cumulative incidences 10.5% vs. 6.7%, and 5.7% vs. 5.7%, respectively). The primary endpoint occurred in 81/717 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 69/738 patients assigned to prasugrel in the preadmission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group (11.5% vs. 9.5%; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.69), and in 103/1295 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 68/1268 patients assigned to prasugrel in the no preadmission aspirin or clopidogrel group (8.0% vs. 5.4%; HR = 1.50 [1.10-2.03]; Pint = 0.382). BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients in the preadmission aspirin and/or clopidogrel (6.2% vs. 4.5%), or no preadmission aspirin or clopidogrel (5.3% vs. 5.1%) groups (Pint = 0.541). CONCLUSION: In patients with ACS, preadmission therapy with aspirin and/or clopidogrel has no influence on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel.

5.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35045943

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Whether the access site influences the comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive treatment strategy remains unstudied. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis included ACS patients undergoing invasive treatment via radial or femoral access and randomized to either ticagrelor or prasugrel in the ISAR-REACT 5 trial. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, safety endpoint was BARC 3 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed out to 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: Out of 4018 patients, 3984 underwent invasive treatment via radial or femoral access. 1479 had coronary angiography via radial access (ticagrelor, N = 748; prasugrel, N = 731) and 2505 via femoral access (ticagrelor, N = 1245; prasugrel, N = 1260). There was no interaction between access route and assignment to either ticagrelor or prasugrel regarding the primary efficacy or safety endpoints (P for interaction≥0.616). In the radial group, the primary efficacy endpoint (7.6% versus 5.8%, HR: 1.32 [0.88-1.97], P = 0.151) and the safety endpoint (4.3% versus 3.0%, HR: 1.36, [0.73-1.31], P = 0.300) were not statistically different in patients receiving either ticagrelor or prasugrel. In the femoral group, the primary efficacy endpoint occurred more frequently in patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to prasugrel (10.3% versus 7.3%, HR: 1.44 [1.10-1.88], P = 0.006) without significant difference in terms of safety endpoint (6.4% versus 5.8%, HR: 1.14, [0.81-1.60], P = 0.470). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS undergoing an invasive treatment strategy, the access route does not influence the comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel. SUMMARY FOR THE ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS: The access route used during the invasive procedure did not significantly affect the relative efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in ACS patients enrolled in the ISAR-REACT 5 trial. There was also no significant difference in bleeding events between ticagrelor and prasugrel as a function of access route. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01944800.

6.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 15(3): 282-293, 2022 02 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35033468

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) could benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy in terms of bleeding reduction without any compromise in ischemic event prevention. BACKGROUND: Patients with history of MI who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain at risk for recurrent ischemic events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for this cohort remains debated. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of the randomized TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, the authors evaluated the impact of history of MI on treatment effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent with at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk feature and free from adverse events at 3 months after index PCI. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, and the key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, MI, or stroke, both at 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 1,937 patients (29.7%) with and 4,595 patients (70.3%) without prior MI were randomized to ticagrelor and placebo or ticagrelor and aspirin. At 1 year after randomization, patients with prior MI experienced higher rates of death, MI, or stroke (5.7% vs 3.2%; P < 0.001) but similar BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding (5.0% vs 5.5%; P = 0.677) compared with patients without prior MI. Ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced the risk for the primary bleeding outcome in patients with (3.4% vs 6.7%; HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76) and without (4.2% vs 7.0%; HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.76; Pinteraction = 0.54) prior MI. Rates of the key secondary ischemic outcome were not significantly different between treatment groups irrespective of history of MI (prior MI, 6.0% vs 5.5% [HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.75-1.58]; no prior MI, 3.1% vs 3.3% [HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.28]; Pinteraction = 0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Ticagrelor monotherapy is associated with significantly lower risk for bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, without any compromise in ischemic prevention, among high-risk patients with history of MI undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242).


Assuntos
Stents Farmacológicos , Infarto do Miocárdio , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio/etiologia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária , Ticagrelor , Resultado do Tratamento
7.
EuroIntervention ; 17(16): 1330-1339, 2022 Mar 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34881696

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the TWILIGHT trial, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was shown to be a safe bleeding avoidance strategy in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after three-month DAPT in patients undergoing PCI, according to DES type. METHODS: In the current sub-analysis from TWILIGHT, patients were stratified into three groups based on DES type: durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES), durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DP-ZES), and biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES). Bleeding and ischaemic outcomes were assessed at one year after randomisation. RESULTS: Out of 5,769 patients, 3,014 (52.2%) had DP-EES, 1,350 (23.4%) had DP-ZES and 1,405 (24.4%) had BP-DES. Compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy had significantly lower BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding compared with DAPT; DP-EES (3.8% vs 6.7%; HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41-0.78), DP-ZES (4.6% vs 6.9%; HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.42-1.04) and BP-DES (4.2% vs 7.9%; HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.81; pinteraction=0.76). Ticagrelor monotherapy resulted in similar rates of death, MI, or stroke: DP-EES (4.2% vs 4.3%; HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68-1.37); DP-ZES (4.1% vs 3.1%; HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.75-2.33); BP-DES (3.9% vs 4.2%; HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.54-1.55; pinteraction=0.60). In both unadjusted and covariate-adjusted analyses, DES type was not associated with any differences in ischaemic or bleeding complications. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short DAPT duration lowered bleeding complications without increasing the ischaemic risk, irrespective of DES type. We observed no significant differences among DES types.


Assuntos
Stents Farmacológicos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Everolimo/farmacologia , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Stents , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento
8.
J Atheroscler Thromb ; 29(5): 747-761, 2022 May 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33867409

RESUMO

AIM: Sex-specific analyses of direct head-to-head comparisons between newer P2Y12 inhibitors are limited. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in women and men with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) planned for an invasive strategy. METHODS: This pre-specified analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 956 women and 3,062 men with ACS randomly assigned to either ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was the 12-month incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety endpoint was the 12-month incidence of bleeding (type 3-5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC]). RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 42 women (8.9%) in the ticagrelor group and 39 women (8.3%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio [HR]=1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.70, P=0.657) and in 142 men (9.4%) in the ticagrelor group and 98 men (6.5%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.47 [1.13-1.90], P=0.004; P for interaction [Pint]=0.275). BARC type 3-5 bleeding occurred in 36 women (9.7%) in the ticagrelor group and 34 women (9.7%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.04 [0.65-1.67], P=0.856) and in 59 men in the ticagrelor group (4.4%) and 46 men (3.6%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.24 [0.85-1.83], P=0.266; Pint=0.571). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment effect of study drugs, the superior efficacy of prasugrel was more evident among men. No difference in bleeding between the two study groups was seen for both women and men.

9.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34961732

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) according to body mass index (BMI) remain unstudied. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with ACS according to BMI. METHODS: Patients (n=3987) were grouped into 3 categories: normal weight (BMI <25kg/m2; n=1084), overweight (BMI ≥ 25 to <30kg/m2; n=1890), and obesity (BMI ≥ 30kg/m2; n=1013). The primary efficacy endpoint was the 1 year incidence of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary safety endpoint was the 1 year incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 63 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 39 patients assigned to prasugrel in the normal weight group (11.7% vs 7.5%; HR, 1.62; 95%CI, 1.09-2.42; P=.018), 78 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 58 patients assigned to prasugrel in the overweight group (8.3% vs 6.2%; HR, 1.36; 95%CI, 0.97-1.91; P=.076), and 43 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 37 patients assigned to prasugrel in the obesity group (8.6% vs 7.3%; HR, 1.18; 95%CI, 0.76-1.84; P=.451). The 1-year incidence of bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with normal weight (6.5% vs 6.6%; P=.990), overweight (5.6% vs 5.0%; P=.566) or obesity (4.4% vs 2.8%; P=.219). There was no significant treatment arm-by-BMI interaction regarding the primary endpoint (Pint=.578) or secondary endpoint (Pint=.596). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS, BMI did not significantly impact the treatment effect of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy or safety. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01944800.

10.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 78(20): 1968-1986, 2021 11 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34763774

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although a 1-year duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is used in many patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the evidence supporting this duration is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated the risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT after DES using 2 novel scores to risk stratify bleeding and ischemic events. METHODS: Ischemic and bleeding risk scores were generated from ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents), a multicenter, international, "all-comers" registry that enrolled 8,665 patients treated with DES. The risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT was then investigated across risk strata from an individual patient data pooled dataset of 7 randomized trials that enrolled 15,083 patients treated with DES. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, the ischemic score and the bleeding score had c-indexes of 0.76 and 0.66, respectively, and both were well calibrated. In the pooled dataset, no significant difference was apparent in any ischemic endpoint between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT, regardless of the risk strata. In the overall dataset, there was no significant difference in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT; however, among 2,508 patients at increased risk of bleeding, 1-year compared with ≤6-month DAPT was associated with greater bleeding (HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.12-7.13) without a reduced risk of ischemic events in any risk strata, including those with acute coronary syndromes. These results were consistent in a network meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the present large-scale study, compared with ≤6-month DAPT, a 1-year duration of DAPT was not associated with reduced adverse ischemic events in any risk strata (including acute coronary syndromes) but was associated with greater bleeding in patients at increased risk of bleeding.


Assuntos
Stents Farmacológicos/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia , Isquemia/fisiopatologia , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Tomada de Decisões , Feminino , Humanos , Cooperação Internacional , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Sistema de Registros , Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 10(22): e021418, 2021 11 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34779234

RESUMO

BACKGROUND Whether there are differences in the risk profile and treatment effect in patients recruited in a low recruitment center (LRC) versus patients recruited in a high recruitment center (HRC) in a randomized multicenter trial remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS This study included 4018 patients with acute coronary syndrome recruited in the ISAR-REACT 5 (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5) trial. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Overall, 3011 patients (75%) were recruited in the HRCs (7 centers recruiting 258 to 628 patients; median, 413 patients) and 1007 patients (25%) were recruited in the LRCs (16 centers recruiting 5 to 201 patients; median, 52 patients). Patients recruited in the LRCs had more favorable cardiovascular risk profiles than patients recruited in the HRCs. The primary end point occurred in 72 patients in the LRCs and 249 patients in the HRCs (cumulative incidence, 7.3% and 8.4%; P=0.267). All-cause mortality was lower among patients recruited in the LRCs (n=29) than among patients recruited in the HRCs (n=134; cumulative incidence 2.9% versus 4.5%; P=0.031). There was no significant interaction between the treatment effect of ticagrelor versus prasugrel and patient recruitment category (LRC versus HRC) regarding the primary efficacy end point (LRC: hazard ratio [HR], 1.42 [95% CI, 0.89-2.28]; HRC: HR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.04-1.72]; P for interaction=0.800). CONCLUSIONS Patients with acute coronary syndrome recruited in a LRC appear to have more favorable cardiovascular risk profiles and lower 1-year mortality rates compared with patients recruited in a HRC. The recruitment volume did not interact with the treatment effect of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Seleção de Pacientes , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/efeitos adversos , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
12.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol ; 78(20): 1968-1986, Nov. 2021. graf, tab
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, Sec. Est. Saúde SP, CONASS, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1353261

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Although a 1-year duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is used in many patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the evidence supporting this duration is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated the risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT after DES using 2 novel scores to risk stratify bleeding and ischemic events. METHODS: Ischemic and bleeding risk scores were generated from ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Drug-Eluting Stents), a multicenter, international, "all-comers" registry that enrolled 8,665 patients treated with DES. The risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT was then investigated across risk strata from an individual patient data pooled dataset of 7 randomized trials that enrolled 15,083 patients treated with DES. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, the ischemic score and the bleeding score had c-indexes of 0.76 and 0.66, respectively, and both were well calibrated. In the pooled dataset, no significant difference was apparent in any ischemic endpoint between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT, regardless of the risk strata. In the overall dataset, there was no significant difference in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT; however, among 2,508 patients at increased risk of bleeding, 1-year compared with ≤6-month DAPT was associated with greater bleeding (HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.12-7.13) without a reduced risk of ischemic events in any risk strata, including those with acute coronary syndromes. These results were consistent in a network meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the present large-scale study, compared with ≤6-month DAPT, a 1-year duration of DAPT was not associated with reduced adverse ischemic events in any risk strata (including acute coronary syndromes) but was associated with greater bleeding in patients at increased risk of bleeding.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Stents Farmacológicos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária , Fatores de Risco
13.
Eur Heart J ; 42(45): 4624-4634, 2021 12 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34662382

RESUMO

AIMS: Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) represent a prevalent subgroup among those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Early aspirin discontinuation after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as a bleeding avoidance strategy. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT in a contemporary HBR population. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prespecified analysis of the TWILIGHT trial evaluated the treatment effects of early aspirin withdrawal followed by ticagrelor monotherapy in HBR patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents. After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomized to 12 months of aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor. A total of 1064 (17.2%) met the Academic Research Consortium definition for HBR. Ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in HBR (6.3% vs. 11.4%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.82) and non-HBR patients (3.5% vs. 5.9%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.77) with similar relative (Pinteraction = 0.67) but a trend towards greater absolute risk reduction in the former [-5.1% vs. -2.3%; difference in absolute risk differences (ARDs) -2.8%, 95% CI -6.4% to 0.8%, P = 0.130]. A similar pattern was observed for more severe BARC 3 or 5 bleeding with a larger absolute risk reduction in HBR patients (-3.5% vs. -0.5%; difference in ARDs -3.0%, 95% CI -5.2% to -0.8%, P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in the key secondary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between treatment arms, irrespective of HBR status. CONCLUSIONS: Among HBR patients undergoing PCI who completed 3-month DAPT without experiencing major adverse events, aspirin discontinuation followed by ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced bleeding without increasing ischaemic events, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. The absolute risk reduction in major bleeding was larger in HBR than non-HBR patients.


Assuntos
Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Quimioterapia Combinada , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
14.
Eur Heart J ; 42(45): 4683-4693, 2021 12 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34423374

RESUMO

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prespecified subanalysis of the TWILIGHT trial, we evaluated the treatment effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin according to renal function. The trial enrolled patients undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation who fulfilled at least one clinical and one angiographic high-risk criterion. Chronic kidney disease, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, was a clinical study entry criterion. Following a 3-month period of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomly assigned to aspirin or placebo on top of ticagrelor for an additional 12 months. Of the 6835 patients randomized and with available eGFR at baseline, 1111 (16.3%) had CKD. Ticagrelor plus placebo reduced the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in both patients with [4.6% vs. 9.0%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.80] and without (4.0% vs. 6.7%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.75; Pinteraction = 0.508) CKD, but the absolute risk reduction was greater in the former group. Rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were not significantly different between the two randomized groups irrespective of the presence (7.9% vs. 5.7%; HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.88-2.22) or absence of (3.2% vs. 3.6%; HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68-1.20; Pinteraction = 0.111) CKD. CONCLUSION: Among CKD patients undergoing PCI, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the risk of bleeding without a significant increase in ischaemic events as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.


Assuntos
Stents Farmacológicos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/complicações , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento
15.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 14(17): 1857-1866, 2021 09 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34446390

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs). BACKGROUND: The outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined. METHODS: Patients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m2), intermediate eGFR (≥60 and <90 mL/min/1.73 m2), and high eGFR (≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year. RESULTS: Patients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800).


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico por imagem , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Taxa de Filtração Glomerular , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
16.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 14(15): 1639-1650, 2021 08 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34353595

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate various stent expansion indexes to determine the best predictor of clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Numerous intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) studies have shown minimum stent area (MSA) to be the most powerful predictor of future events. METHODS: ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a prospective, multicenter registry of 8,582 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents. Native coronary artery lesions treated with IVUS-guided PCI with final analyzable IVUS were included. Ten stent expansion indexes (MSA, MSA/vessel area at MSA site, conventional stent expansion [MSA/average of proximal and distal reference luminal area], minimum stent expansion using Huo-Kassab or linear model accounting for vessel tapering, stent asymmetry [minimum/maximum stent diameter within the entire stent], stent eccentricity [smallest minimum/maximum stent diameter at a single slice within the stent], IVUS-XPL [Impact of intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesions] criteria, ULTIMATE [Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Drug Eluting Stents Implantation in "All-Comers" Coronary Lesions] criteria, and ILUMIEN IV criteria) were evaluated for their associations with lesion-specific 2-year clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) or definite stent thrombosis. RESULTS: Overall, 2,140 lesions in 1,831 patients were included; final MSA measured 6.2 ± 2.4 mm2. Among the 10 stent expansion indexes, only MSA/vessel area at the MSA site was independently associated with 2-year clinically driven TLR or definite stent thrombosis (hazard ratio: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.99; P = 0.04) after adjusting for morphologic and procedural parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In this IVUS-guided PCI cohort with excellent final MSA overall, stent/vessel area at the MSA site, an index of relative stent expansion, was superior to absolute MSA and other expansion indexes in predicting 2-year clinically driven TLR or definite stent thrombosis.


Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Angiografia Coronária , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Stents , Resultado do Tratamento , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção
17.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 14(13): 1434-1446, 2021 07 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34238553

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of age on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: As the risk for bleeding and ischemic complications after PCI increases with age, the authors conducted a pre-specified analysis of the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial to evaluate the possible benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy according to age. METHODS: The TWILIGHT trial enrolled patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents who fulfilled at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk criterion. Age ≥65 years was a clinical entry criterion. After 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, event-free patients were randomized to ticagrelor plus placebo or ticagrelor plus aspirin for an additional 12 months. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: A total of 3,113 patients (47.7%) were ≥65 years of age. At 1 year after randomization, ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (4.5% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.40 to 0.71) without increasing ischemic events (4.2% vs. 4.4%; hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.35) compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin among patients ≥65 years of age. These findings were consistent in patients <65 years of age with respect to the primary (pinteraction = 0.62) and key secondary (pinteraction = 0.77) endpoints and across different age categories. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of ticagrelor monotherapy following 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced clinically relevant bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin without an increase in ischemic events, irrespective of age.


Assuntos
Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Ticagrelor , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
18.
JAMA Cardiol ; 6(10): 1121-1129, 2021 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34190967

RESUMO

Importance: It is unclear whether ticagrelor or prasugrel hydrochloride is superior for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor vs prasugrel for patients with ACS treated with PCI. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prespecified analysis was performed of a postrandomization subgroup of 3377 patients who presented with ACS and were treated with PCI in the investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase 4, open-label Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5 randomized clinical trial, conducted from September 1, 2013, to February 28, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from September 1, 2020, to January 30, 2021. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to a ticagrelor-based or prasugrel-based strategy. This analysis focuses on the subgroup of patients who underwent PCI that was formed after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 12 months. The safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding. Results: The ticagrelor group comprised 1676 patients (1323 men [78.9%]; mean [SD] age, 64.4 [12.0] years), and the prasugrel group comprised 1701 patients (1341 men [78.8%]; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [12.0] years). The primary end point occurred for 162 patients (9.8%) in the ticagrelor group and 120 patients (7.1%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.78; P = .005). Myocardial infarction occurred in 88 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor group compared with 55 patients (3.8%) in the prasugrel group (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19-2.34; P = .003). The safety end point, BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding, occurred in 84 of 1672 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor group and 78 of 1680 patients (4.9%) in the prasugrel group (HR; 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81-1.50; P = .54). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients presenting with ACS who were treated with PCI, the incidence of the primary composite end point occurred less frequently for patients who received prasugrel compared with those who received ticagrelor. The incidence of bleeding events was comparable between the 2 groups. These results suggest that, for patients presenting with ACS who undergo PCI, a prasugrel-based strategy is superior to a ticagrelor-based strategy. However, because these observations are based on a postrandomization subgroup, these findings should be regarded as hypothesis generating and dedicated randomized clinical trials may be warranted to confirm these findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01944800.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/terapia , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/uso terapêutico , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Stents , Resultado do Tratamento
19.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 863-872, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34126053

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 entry in human cells depends on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which can be upregulated by inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). We aimed to test our hypothesis that discontinuation of chronic treatment with ACE-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigates the course o\f recent-onset COVID-19. METHODS: ACEI-COVID was a parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial done at 35 centres in Austria and Germany. Patients aged 18 years and older were enrolled if they presented with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and were chronically treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to discontinuation or continuation of RAS inhibition for 30 days. Primary outcome was the maximum sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 30 days, where death was scored with the maximum achievable SOFA score. Secondary endpoints were area under the death-adjusted SOFA score (AUCSOFA), mean SOFA score, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353596. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2020, and Jan 20, 2021, 204 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 66-80], 37% females) were randomly assigned to discontinue (n=104) or continue (n=100) RAS inhibition. Within 30 days, eight (8%) of 104 died in the discontinuation group and 12 (12%) of 100 patients died in the continuation group (p=0·42). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between the discontinuation and continuation group (median [IQR] maximum SOFA score 0·00 (0·00-2·00) vs 1·00 (0·00-3·00); p=0·12). Discontinuation was associated with a significantly lower AUCSOFA (0·00 [0·00-9·25] vs 3·50 [0·00-23·50]; p=0·040), mean SOFA score (0·00 [0·00-0·31] vs 0·12 [0·00-0·78]; p=0·040), and 30-day SOFA score (0·00 [10-90th percentile, 0·00-1·20] vs 0·00 [0·00-24·00]; p=0·023). At 30 days, 11 (11%) in the discontinuation group and 23 (23%) in the continuation group had signs of organ dysfunction (SOFA score ≥1) or were dead (p=0·017). There were no significant differences for mechanical ventilation (10 (10%) vs 8 (8%), p=0·87) and admission to intensive care unit (20 [19%] vs 18 [18%], p=0·96) between the discontinuation and continuation group. INTERPRETATION: Discontinuation of RAS-inhibition in COVID-19 had no significant effect on the maximum severity of COVID-19 but may lead to a faster and better recovery. The decision to continue or discontinue should be made on an individual basis, considering the risk profile, the indication for RAS inhibition, and the availability of alternative therapies and outpatient monitoring options. FUNDING: Austrian Science Fund and German Center for Cardiovascular Research.


Assuntos
Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina , COVID-19 , Hipertensão , Sistema Renina-Angiotensina , SARS-CoV-2 , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Enzima de Conversão de Angiotensina 2/metabolismo , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/administração & dosagem , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Área Sob a Curva , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/metabolismo , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Hipertensão/tratamento farmacológico , Hipertensão/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Escores de Disfunção Orgânica , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Sistema Renina-Angiotensina/efeitos dos fármacos , Sistema Renina-Angiotensina/fisiologia , Risco Ajustado/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , SARS-CoV-2/fisiologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Suspensão de Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...