Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of Ticagrelor Versus Thienopyridine Loading Effect on Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.
Alexopoulos, Dimitrios; Davlouros, Periklis; Tsigkas, Grigorios; Koutsogiannis, Nikolaos; Hassapi, Athena; Scortsanitis, Christos; Pentara, Ioanna; Vogiatzi, Chrysoula; Xanthopoulou, Ioanna.
Affiliation
  • Alexopoulos D; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece. Electronic address: dalex@med.upatras.gr.
  • Davlouros P; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Tsigkas G; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Koutsogiannis N; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Hassapi A; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Scortsanitis C; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Pentara I; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Vogiatzi C; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
  • Xanthopoulou I; Department of Cardiology, Patras University Hospital, Patras, Greece.
Am J Cardiol ; 117(1): 22-8, 2016 Jan 01.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26552503
ABSTRACT
Ticagrelor loading dose (LD) increases adenosine plasma levels, which might interfere with fractional flow reserve (FFR) assessment because the latter is based on adenosine-induced hyperemia. In a prospective study, consecutive patients who underwent coronary angiography with at least 1 de novo stenosis >50% and <90% in severity amenable to intervention underwent FFR assessment using intravenous adenosine 140 µg/kg/min for 3 minutes. Patients were subsequently randomized to either ticagrelor 180 mg (n = 38) or control thienopyridine (n = 38) (prasugrel 60 mg [n = 28] or clopidogrel 600 mg [n = 10]), followed by a second FFR assessment of the target lesion 2 hours after drug. Pre-drug, steady hyperemia FFR (sFFR, median, first to third quartiles) was 0.82 (0.75 to 0.88) and 0.81 (0.75 to 0.88), p = 0.9, whereas post-drug, 0.82 (0.72 to 0.87) and 0.79 (0.73 to 0.86), p = 0.5, in thienopyridine and ticagrelor-treated patients, respectively. The primary end point of percent relative change in sFFR between pre- and post-drug periods was greater in ticagrelor- than thienopyridine-treated patients, -1.24 (-5.54 to 0.0) versus -0.51 (-3.68 to 3.21), p = 0.03, respectively. Absolute change in sFFR between pre- and post-drug periods was marginally higher in ticagrelor- than thienopyridine-treated patients -0.01 (-0.04 to 0.0) versus -0.005 (-0.03 to 0.02), p = 0.048, respectively. Reclassification of treatment decision at the sFFR ≤ 0.80 cutoff post-drug occurred in 6 (15.8%) versus 5 (13.2%) of ticagrelor- and thienopyridine-treated patients, respectively. In conclusion, after ticagrelor LD, an absolute and relative reduction in sFFR compared with thienopyridine LD is observed. Administration of ticagrelor should be considered as a potential source, albeit minor, of FFR variability.
Sujet(s)

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Pyridines / Maladie des artères coronaires / Adénosine / Fraction du flux de réserve coronaire Type d'étude: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Langue: En Journal: Am J Cardiol Année: 2016 Type de document: Article

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Pyridines / Maladie des artères coronaires / Adénosine / Fraction du flux de réserve coronaire Type d'étude: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Langue: En Journal: Am J Cardiol Année: 2016 Type de document: Article