Antiplatelet De-Escalation Strategies in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Dual antiplatelet therapy-the combination of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor-remains the standard antiplatelet regimen recommended to prevent ischemic complications immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention. Nonetheless, recent advances in stent technologies, percutaneous coronary intervention techniques, adjunctive pharmacotherapy for secondary prevention, and the rising awareness of the prognostic impact of bleeding, which are inevitably associated with dual antiplatelet therapy, led to the investigation of alternative antiplatelet regimens related to fewer bleeding and a preserved ischemic protection. Thrombotic complications occur mostly in the first months after percutaneous coronary intervention, while the risk of bleeding remains stable over time; this observation laid the foundation of the concept of antiplatelet de-escalation, consisting of a more intense antiplatelet regimen early after percutaneous coronary intervention, followed by a less potent antiplatelet therapy thereafter. According to new definitions proposed by the Academic Research Consortium, de-escalation can be achieved by discontinuation of 1 antiplatelet agent, switching from a potent P2Y12 inhibitor to clopidogrel, or by reducing the dose of antiplatelet agents. This review discusses the rationale and the evidence supporting antiplatelet de-escalation, provides practical guidance to use these new regimens, and gives insights into future developments in the field.

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials.

BACKGROUND: Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals. METHODS: Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

Quantitative Benefit-Risk Evaluation of Rivaroxaban in Patients After Peripheral Arterial Revascularization: The VOYAGER PAD Trial.

BACKGROUND: The VOYAGER PAD (Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Major Thrombotic Vascular Events in Subjects With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease Undergoing Peripheral Revascularization Procedures of the Lower Extremities) trial compared rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin with aspirin alone in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease requiring endovascular or surgical limb revascularization, with 50% receiving clopidogrel background therapy. The New Drug Indication application includes benefit-risk assessments using clinical judgment to balance benefits against risks. During its review, the US Food and Drug Administration requested additional quantitative benefit-risk analyses with formal weighting approaches. METHODS AND RESULTS: Benefits and risks were assessed using rate differences between treatment groups (unweighted analysis). To account for clinical importance of the end points, a multi-criteria decision analysis was conducted using health state utility values as weights. Monte Carlo simulations incorporated statistical uncertainties of the event rates and utility weights. Intent-to-treat and on-treatment analyses were conducted. For unweighted intent-to-treat analyses, rivaroxaban plus aspirin would result in 120 (95% CI, -208 to -32) fewer events of the primary composite end point (per 10 000 patient-years) compared with aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban caused an excess of 40 (95% CI, 8-72) Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events, which was largely driven by nonfatal, nonintracranial hemorrhage Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding events. For weighted analyses, rivaroxaban resulted in the utility equivalent of 13.7 (95% CI, -85.3 to 52.6) and 68.1 (95% CI, 7.9-135.7) fewer deaths per 10 000 patient-years (intent-to-treat and on-treatment, respectively), corresponding to probabilities of 64.4% and 98.7%, respectively, that benefits outweigh risks favoring rivaroxaban per Monte Carlo simulation. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses show a favorable benefit-risk profile of rivaroxaban therapy in the VOYAGER PAD trial, with findings generally consistent between the unweighted and weighted approaches.

Anticoagulation for Patients With Concomitant Atrial Fibrillation and End-Stage Renal Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease is common and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Although oral anticoagulants have been well established to prevent thromboembolism, the applicability in patients under long-term dialysis remains debatable. The study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in the dialysis-dependent population. METHODS AND RESULTS: An updated network meta-analysis based on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed. Studies published up to December 2022 were included. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban 2.5/5 mg twice daily), vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), and no anticoagulation were compared on safety and efficacy outcomes. The outcomes of interest were major bleeding, thromboembolism, and all-cause death. A total of 42 studies, including 3 randomized controlled trials, with 185 864 subjects were pooled. VKAs were associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding than either no anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47; 95% CI, 1.34-1.61) or DOACs (DOACs versus VKAs; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.64-0.84]). For the prevention of thromboembolism, the efficacies of VKAs, DOACs, and no anticoagulation were equivalent. Nevertheless, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with fewer embolic events. There were no differences in all-cause death with the administration of VKAs, DOACs, or no anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: For dialysis-dependent populations, dabigatran and rivaroxaban were associated with better efficacy, while dabigatran and apixaban demonstrated better safety. No anticoagulation was a noninferior alterative, and VKAs were associated with the worst outcomes.

[Antithrombotic therapy in acute coronary syndrome]. / Antithrombotische Therapie beim akuten Koronarsyndrom.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the cornerstone of maintenance medication following acute coronary syndromes (ST elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, unstable angina). Over the last decade, P2Y12 inhibition in addition to low-dose acetylsalicylic acid has been intensively debated. In patients with acute coronary syndromes, balancing the reduction in cardiovascular events and increase in major bleeding during treatment with more potent P2Y12 inhibitors such as prasugrel and ticagrelor is still an issue. A special focus is on patients already treated with oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation who require additional platelet inhibition following coronary stenting. This article summarizes the major recommendations given in the most recent Guideline for "Acute Coronary Syndromes" published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). The recommendations finally address strategies to reduce an increased bleeding risk based on clinical predictors.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion and risk of stroke, hospitalized bleeding and death in Medicare beneficiaries.

PURPOSE: Among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), a nonpharmacologic option (e.g., percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion [LAAO]) is needed for patients with oral anticoagulant (OAC) contraindications. Among beneficiaries in the Medicare fee-for-service coverage 20% sample databases (2015-18) who had AF and an elevated CHA2DS2-VASc score, we assessed the association between percutaneous LAAO versus OAC use and risk of stroke, hospitalized bleeding, and death. METHODS: Patients undergoing percutaneous LAAO were matched to up to five OAC users by sex, age, date of enrollment, index date, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and HAS-BLED score. Overall, 17 156 patients with AF (2905 with percutaneous LAAO) were matched (average ± SD 78 ± 6 years, 44% female). Cox proportional hazards model were used. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 10.3 months. After multivariable adjustments, no significant difference for risk of stroke or death was noted when patients with percutaneous LAAO were compared with OAC users (HRs [95% CIs]: 1.14 [0.86-1.52], 0.98 [0.86-1.10]). There was a 2.94-fold (95% CI: 2.50-3.45) increased risk for hospitalized bleeding for percutaneous LAAO compared with OAC use. Among patients 65 to <78 years old, those undergoing percutaneous LAAO had higher risk of stroke compared with OAC users. No association was present in those ≥78 years. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of real-world AF patients, percutaneous LAAO versus OAC use was associated with similar risk of death, nonsignificantly elevated risk of stroke, and an elevated risk of bleeding in the post-procedural period. Overall, these results support results of randomized trials that percutaneous LAAO may be an alternative to OAC use for patients with contraindications.

International Normalized Ratio Predicts Recurrence and Bleeding in Patients With Acute Venous Thromboembolism Who Undergo Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Prothrombin time/international normalized ratio (PT/INR) is related to both antithrombotic effect and risk of bleeding. Its role in the prediction of venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence and bleeding for patients with acute VTE who undergo direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) treatment is unclear, despite previous studies revealed some association between them. The predictive efficiency of INR for VTE recurrence and bleeding were analyzed in a retrospective cohort with VTE patients who underwent DOACs treatment. Then its predictive efficiency for VTE recurrence and bleeding were validated in a prospective cohort with the acquired cutoffs range, and compared with anti-Xa level, DASH and VTE-BLEED scores. In the retrospective cohort (n = 1083), the sensitivity and specificity of INR for the prediction of VTE recurrence were 79.4% and 92.8%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.881 (0.803-0.960)(P = .025). The cutoff value of INR was 0.9. The sensitivity and specificity of INR for the prediction of bleeding were 85.7% and 77.9%, respectively. The AUC was 0.876 (0.786-0.967)(P < .001). The cutoff value of INR was 2.1. In the prospective cohort (n = 202), the calibration showed that there were 4 (50%) patients with VTE recurrence, 156 (97.5%) patients with non-recurrence and bleeding (non-R&B), and 20 (58.8%) patients with bleeding in the low (INR < 0.9)(n = 8), intermediate (0.9 ≤ INR ≤ 2.1)(n = 160), and high (INR > 2.1)(n = 34) groups, respectively. The baseline PT/INR value at the initiation of DOACs treatment is an independent predictor for VTE recurrence and bleeding in patients with acute VTE who undergo DOACs treatment.

Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Acute Large-Vessel Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Single-Blinded Trial.

BACKGROUND: Large-vessel ischemic stroke represents about 25-40% of all ischemic strokes. Few clinical trials compared ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in ischemic stroke patients; all these studies included only patients with a transient ischemic attack or minor stroke; moreover, none of these studies included patients from North Africa. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the first-ever large-vessel occlusion (LVO) acute ischemic stroke in Egypt. METHODS: Our trial involved 580 first-ever LVO ischemic stroke patients who were randomly assigned to administer loading and maintenance doses of ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Screening, randomization, and start of treatment occurred during the first 24 hours of the stroke. RESULTS: 580 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Thirty patients in the ticagrelor group and 49 patients in the clopidogrel group experienced a new ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke at 90 days (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.98; p-value = 0.04), 36 patients in the ticagrelor group, and 57 in the clopidogrel group experienced composite of a new stroke, myocardial infarction, or death due to vascular insults (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37-0.87; p = 0.009). Patients who received ticagrelor had better clinical outcomes regarding National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) reduction and a favorable modified Rankin scale (mRS) score. There were no differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION: Patients with acute large-vessel ischemic stroke who received ticagrelor within the first 24 hours after ischemic stroke had better clinical outcomes based on recurrent stroke rates, NIHSS reduction, and favorable mRS rates compared with those who received clopidogrel. There were no differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel regarding hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov (NCT06120725).

Real-world performance of indobufen versus aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the ASPIRATION registry.

BACKGROUND: Indobufen is widely used in patients with aspirin intolerance in East Asia. The OPTION trial launched by our cardiac center examined the performance of indobufen based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the vast majority of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and aspirin intolerance were excluded. We aimed to explore this question in a real-world population. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the ASPIRATION registry were grouped according to the DAPT strategy that they received after PCI. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. Propensity score matching (PSM) was adopted for confounder adjustment. RESULTS: A total of 7135 patients were reviewed. After one-year follow-up, the indobufen group was associated with the same risk of MACCE versus the aspirin group after PSM (6.5% vs. 6.5%, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65 to 1.52, P = 0.978). However, BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was significantly reduced (3.0% vs. 11.9%, HR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40, P < 0.001). These results were generally consistent across different subgroups including aspirin intolerance, except that indobufen appeared to increase the risk of MACCE in patients with ACS. CONCLUSIONS: Indobufen shared the same risk of MACCE but a lower risk of bleeding after PCI versus aspirin from a real-world perspective. Due to the observational nature of the current analysis, future studies are still warranted to further evaluate the efficacy of indobufen based DAPT, especially in patients with ACS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Register ( https://www.chictr.org.cn ); Number: ChiCTR2300067274.

Antithrombotic therapy for stable coronary artery disease and atrial fibrillation in patients with and without revascularisation: the AFIRE trial.

BACKGROUND: The Atrial Fibrillation and Ischemic Events with Rivaroxaban in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease (AFIRE) trial demonstrated non-inferior efficacy endpoints for rivaroxaban monotherapy versus combination therapy (rivaroxaban plus a single antiplatelet) and superior safety endpoints in patients with atrial fibrillation and stable coronary artery disease. AIMS: This post hoc analysis investigated whether the AFIRE trial results reflected the presence or absence of prior revascularisation. METHODS: Among 2,215 patients, 1,697 (76.6%) had previously undergone revascularisation, and the remaining 518 (23.4%) had not undergone prior revascularisation. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring revascularisation, or death from any cause, while the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. RESULTS: In 1,697 patients with prior revascularisation, the efficacy and safety endpoints were superior for monotherapy versus combination therapy (efficacy: hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.85; p=0.003; safety: HR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-0.98; p=0.042). Among 518 without prior revascularisation, there were no significant differences in endpoints (efficacy: HR 1.19, 95% CI: 0.67-2.12; p=0.554; safety: HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.18-1.26; p=0.134). There was borderline interaction of the efficacy endpoints (p=0.055) between two treatments. The safety benefit of monotherapy on any bleeding was significant in patients without prior revascularisation (HR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.38-0.93; p=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk thrombosis patients with a history of prior revascularisation, rivaroxaban monotherapy versus combination therapy demonstrated favourable safety and efficacy outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of antiplatelet therapy in COVID-19: Insights from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 induces a pro-coagulant state with thrombotic events. This meta-analysis explores the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet-based therapy in COVID-19 patients through randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search until March 10, 2023, identified 7 RCTs involving 23,415 inpatients. Of these, 11,891 received antiplatelet-based treatment, and 11,524 received placebo/other drugs. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. RESULTS: The included trials involved patients with a mean age ranging from 54.3 to 62.0 years and a prevalence of hypertension ranging from 10.9 to 65.0% and coronary artery disease ranging from 3.2 to 32.7%. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in overall mortality between groups (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.99 - 1.01, p = 0.76). However, antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced major thrombotic events (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75 - 0.99, p = 0.04). Conversely, it increased major bleeding risks (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.24 - 2.12, p = 0.0005). There was no significant difference in the incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation and respiratory death. CONCLUSION: Antiplatelet therapy does not confer mortality benefit in COVID-19 patients but lowers major thrombotic events while increasing major bleeding risks. Ongoing large RCTs will provide more information on the therapeutic value of this therapy.

Toward Genetic Testing of Rivaroxaban? Insights from a Systematic Review on the Role of Genetic Polymorphism in Rivaroxaban Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Investigations into the rivaroxaban response from the perspective of genetic variation have been relatively recent and wide in scope, whereas there is no consensus on the necessity of genetic testing of rivaroxaban. Thus, this systematic review aims to thoroughly evaluate the relationship between genetic polymorphisms and rivaroxaban outcomes. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Chinese databases were searched to 23 October 2022. We included cohort studies reporting the pharmacogenetic correlation of rivaroxaban. Outcomes measured included efficacy (all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events and coagulation-related tests), safety (major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding [CRNMB] and any hemorrhage), and pharmacokinetic outcomes. A narrative synthesis was performed to summarize findings from individual studies according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the reporting guideline for Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies published between 2019 and 2022 involving 1364 patients were included. Ten, one, and six studies focused on the ABCB1, ABCG2, and CYP gene polymorphisms, respectively. Pharmacokinetic outcomes accounted for the majority of the outcomes reported (n = 11), followed by efficacy (n = 5) [including prothrombin time (PT) or international normalized ratio (n = 3), platelet inhibition rate (PIR) or platelet reactivity units (PRUs; n = 1), thromboembolic events (n = 1)], and safety (n = 5) [including major bleeding (n = 2), CRNMB (n = 2), any hemorrhage (n = 1)]. For ABCB1 gene polymorphism, the relationship between PT and ABCB1 rs1045642 was inconsistent across studies, however there was no pharmacogenetic relationship with other efficacy outcomes. Safety associations were found in ABCB1 rs4148738 and major bleeding, ABCB1 rs4148738 and CRNMB, ABCB1 rs1045642 and CRNMB, and ABCB1 rs2032582 and hemorrhage. Pharmacokinetic results were inconsistent among studies. For ABCG2 gene polymorphism, no correlation was observed between ABCG2 rs2231142 and dose-adjusted trough concentration (Cmin/D). For CYP gene polymorphisms, PIR or PRUs have a relationship with CYP2C19 rs12248560, however bleeding or pharmacokinetic effects did not show similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available data are insufficient to confirm the relationship between clinical or pharmacokinetic outcomes of rivaroxaban and gene polymorphisms. Proactive strategies are advised as a priority in clinical practice rather than detection of SNP genotyping. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42022347907.

Tigecycline-associated hypofibrinogenemia: A single center, retrospective, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Tigecycline-associated hypofibrinogenemia has been reported as an important adverse effect in recent years, but controlled studies minimizing confounding factors are needed. The objective of our study was to assess changes in fibrinogen levels in patients for hospitalization, comparing two antibiotic episodes (tigecycline and other) within the same patients. METHODS: The retrospective, self-controlled case series study was conducted at our University Hospitals. The study compared the change in fibrinogen levels during the patient's hospitalization for tigecycline (TigePer) and another antibiotic period (OtherPer). In addition, bleeding events, bleeding risk (determined by the IMPROVE bleeding risk score), as well as 15- and 30-day mortality rates between TigePer and OtherPer were compared. RESULTS: The study enrolled 50 patients with 100 episodes of antibiotic treatment. The median age (interquartile range) of the patients was 68.5 (21.5) years, and 38 % were female. As compared to OtherPer, TigePer had a statistically significant reduction in fibrinogen levels (p < 0.001), with a hypofibrinogenemia rate of 40 % in TigePer as compared to 2 % in OtherPer (p < 0.001). TigePer demonstrated a significantly higher 15-day mortality rate (p = 0.006). No significant differences were observed between the two periods in terms of bleeding risk, rate of bleeding events, and 30-day mortality rate (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Hypofibrinogenemia and other coagulopathies, without associated bleeding events, are more frequently observed in patients receiving tigecycline. Therefore, it is crucial for clinicians to monitor fibrinogen levels during tigecycline use.

Fragility and long-term clinical outcomes in patients with venous thromboembolism receiving direct oral anticoagulants: From the COMMAND VTE REGISTRY-2.

INTRODUCTION: There is limited data on the safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in fragile patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the COMMAND VTE Registry-2 enrolling patients with acute symptomatic VTE. The study population consisted of 3928 patients receiving DOACs, who were divided into fragile (2136 patients) and non-fragile groups (1792 patients). Fragility was defined as patients of age ≥ 75 years, creatinine clearance level ≤ 50 ml/min, and/or body weight ≤ 50 kg. RESULTS: The fragile group significantly more often received reduced doses of DOACs compared to the non-fragile group (51 % and 19 %, P < 0.001). The cumulative 5-year incidence of major bleeding was numerically higher in the fragile group than the non-fragile group (15.0 % and 11.1 %, P = 0.052), even with no significant excess risk after adjusting for confounders (HR 1.03, 95%CI 0.81-1.31, P = 0.78). The cumulative 5-year incidence of clinically relevant bleeding was significantly higher in the fragile group than the non-fragile group (28.6 % and 19.6 %, P < 0.001), even after adjusting for confounders (HR 1.28, 95%CI 1.08-1.53, P = 0.005). There was no significant difference in cumulative 5-year incidence of recurrent VTE between the groups (9.6 % and 8.9 %, P = 0.68), which was consistent after adjusting for confounders (HR 1.13, 95%CI 0.84-1.51, P = 0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Among VTE patients receiving DOACs, fragile patients were associated with a numerically higher rate of major bleeding and a significantly increased risk of clinically relevant bleeding, but not an increased risk of recurrent VTE.

Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients Who Have Undergone Revascularization Within the Past Year: Which Agents and for How Long?

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor is recommended for at least 6 and 12 months following percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome, respectively. Additional exposure to antiplatelet therapy reduces ischemic events but also increases bleeding risk. Conversely, shorter durations of DAPT are preferred among those at high bleeding risk. Hence, decisions surrounding duration of DAPT after revascularization should include clinical judgment, assessment of the risk of bleeding and ischemic events, and time after revascularization.

Concomitant Use of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors With Oral Anticoagulants and Risk of Major Bleeding.

Importance: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed antidepressants associated with a small increased risk of major bleeding. However, the risk of bleeding associated with the concomitant use of SSRIs and oral anticoagulants (OACs) has not been well characterized. Objectives: To assess whether concomitant use of SSRIs with OACs is associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared with OAC use alone, describe how the risk varies with duration of use, and identify key clinical characteristics modifying this risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: A population-based, nested case-control study was conducted among patients with atrial fibrillation initiating OACs between January 2, 1998, and March 29, 2021. Patients were from approximately 2000 general practices in the UK contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. With the use of risk-set sampling, for each case of major bleeding during follow-up, up to 30 controls were selected from risk sets defined by the case and matched on age, sex, cohort entry date, and follow-up duration. Exposures: Concomitant use of SSRIs and OACs (direct OACs and vitamin K antagonists [VKAs]) compared with OAC use alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of hospitalization for bleeding or death due to bleeding. Results: There were 42 190 patients with major bleeding (mean [SD] age, 74.2 [9.3] years; 59.8% men) matched to 1 156 641 controls (mean [SD] age, 74.2 [9.3] years; 59.8% men). Concomitant use of SSRIs and OACs was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared with OACs alone (IRR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.24-1.42). The risk peaked during the initial months of treatment (first 30 days of use: IRR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.37-2.22) and persisted for up to 6 months. The risk did not vary with age, sex, history of bleeding, chronic kidney disease, and potency of SSRIs. An association was present both with concomitant use of SSRIs and direct OACs compared with direct OAC use alone (IRR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.12-1.40) and concomitant use of SSRIs and VKAs compared with VKA use alone (IRR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.25-1.47). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that among patients with atrial fibrillation, concomitant use of SSRIs and OACs was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared with OAC use alone, requiring close monitoring and management of risk factors for bleeding, particularly in the first few months of use.

Discovery of 2,3-Dihydro[1,4]dioxino[2,3-g]benzofuran Derivatives as Protease Activated Receptor 4 (PAR4) Antagonists with Potent Antiplatelet Aggregation Activity and Low Bleeding Tendency.

Patients with arterial embolic disease have benefited greatly from antiplatelet therapy. However, hemorrhage risk of antiplatelet agents cannot be ignored. Herein, we describe the discovery of 2,3-dihydro[1,4]dioxino[2,3-g]benzofuran compounds as novel PAR4 antagonists. Notably, the isomers 36 and 37 with the chemotype of phenoxyl methylene substituted on the 2,3-dihydro-1,4-dioxine ring exhibited potent in vitro antiplatelet activity (IC50 = 26.13 nM for 36 and 14.26 nM for 37) and significantly improved metabolic stability in human liver microsomes (T1/2 = 97.6 min for 36 and 11.1 min for BMS-986120). 36 also displayed good oral PK profiles (mice: T1/2 = 7.32 h and F = 45.11%). Both of them showed overall potent ex vivo antiplatelet activity at concentrations of 6 and 12 mg/kg, with no impact on the coagulation system and low bleeding liability. Our work will facilitate development of novel PAR4 antagonists as a safer therapeutic option for arterial embolism.

Should left atrial appendage closure be considered in resistant left atrial appendage thrombus cases? 'Former Foe, New Ally'.

BACKGROUND: The study explores left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) as a safe and effective alternative to anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients at high bleeding risk. Complications, such as cardioembolic events due to left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT), highlight the need for alternative stroke prevention strategies. AIMS: This research assesses LAAC's safety and efficacy in patients with LAAT, aiming to offer valuable insights into its potential as a viable option for stroke prevention in such cases. METHODS: The study included 205 patients who underwent LAAC using specific devices between September 2015 and February 2023. Among them, 32 patients had persistent LAAT. Baseline characteristics, antithrombotic medications, risk scores, and LAAC indications were documented. Patients were followed to monitor significant clinical events like stroke, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: The mean age was 71.9 and mostly female. Indications for LAAC were ischemic cerebrovascular events (CVE) despite anticoagulation (25%), bleeding complications (major/minor, 37.5% each), or both. Successful LAA closure was achieved in all cases, with minimal pericardial effusion in one. One-month follow-up showed no major events or device-related issues. Median follow-up of 16.5 months saw 21.9% non-cardiac deaths. The study underscores LAAC's efficacy for stroke prevention in patients with persistent LAAT. CONCLUSIONS: The LAAC in cases of LAAT, whether pursued initially or as a deferred approach, demonstrates feasibility and safety, exhibiting notable procedural success and minimal incidence of periprocedural complications.

The optimal antithrombotic strategy for post-stroke patients with atrial fibrillation and extracranial artery stenosis-a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In post-stroke atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who have indications for both oral anticoagulant (OAC) and antiplatelet agent (AP), e.g., those with carotid artery stenosis, there is debate over the best antithrombotic strategy. We aimed to compare the risks of ischemic stroke, composite of ischemic stroke/major bleeding and composite of ischemic stroke/intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) between different antithrombotic strategies. METHODS: This study included post-stroke AF patients with and without extracranial artery stenosis (ECAS) (n = 6390 and 28,093, respectively) identified from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Risks of clinical outcomes and net clinical benefit (NCB) with different antithrombotic strategies were compared to AP alone. RESULTS: The risk of recurrent ischemic stroke was higher for patients with ECAS than those without (12.72%/yr versus 10.60/yr; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.104, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.052-1.158, p < 0.001). For patients with ECAS, when compared to AP only, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) monotherapy was associated with lower risks for ischaemic stroke (aHR 0.551, 95% CI 0.454-0.669), the composite of ischaemic stroke/major bleeding (aHR 0.626, 95% CI 0.529-0.741) and the composite of ischaemic stroke/ICH (aHR 0.577, 95% CI 0.478-0.697), with non-significant difference for major bleeding and ICH. When compared to AP only, warfarin monotherapy was associated with higher risks of major bleeding (aHR 1.521, 95% CI 1.231-1.880), ICH (aHR 2.045, 95% CI 1.329-3.148), and the composite of ischaemic stroke and major bleeding. With combination of AP plus warfarin, there was an increase in ischaemic stroke, major bleeding, and the composite outcomes, when compared to AP only. NOAC monotherapy was the only approach associated with a positive NCB, while all other options (warfarin, combination of AP-OAC) were associated with negative NCB. CONCLUSIONS: For post-stroke AF patients with ECAS, NOAC monotherapy was associated with lower risks of adverse outcomes and a positive NCB. Combination of AP with NOAC or warfarin did not offer any benefit, but more bleeding especially with AP-warfarin combination therapy.

Effects of thienopyridine class antiplatelets on bleeding outcomes following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

This study aimed to assess the effects of thienopyridine-class antiplatelet agents (including ticlopidine, clopidogrel, and prasugrel) on bleeding complications in patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. This cohort study used a database for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at 23 tertiary centers nationwide between 2011 and 2022. Patients who received thienopyridines (thienopyridine group) were compared with those who received aspirin monotherapy (aspirin group). The primary outcome was the incidence of bleeding complications. High-grade complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher. The risks of these outcomes were evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weighted regression models. The study results demonstrated that thienopyridine therapy was associated with a higher risk of overall bleeding complications (OR: 3.62, 95%CI 1.54-8.49). The increased risks of the thienopyridine group were detected for low-grade bleeding complications (OR: 3.20, 95%CI 1.23-8.30) but not for high-grade bleeding complications (OR: 5.23, 95%CI 0.78-34.9). The increased risk of bleeding complications was not observed when thienopyridine was discontinued (OR: 2.52, 95%CI 0.83-7.70); however, it became apparent when it was continued perioperatively (OR: 4.35, 95%CI 1.14-16.61). In conclusion, thienopyridine increased the incidence of bleeding complications, particularly low-grade bleeding complications, following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. These bleeding effects emerged when thienopyridine was continued perioperatively.