716 research outputs found

    De-escalation of antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes: Why, how and when?

    No full text
    The synergistic blockade of the key platelet signaling pathways of cyclooxygenase-1 blockade and P2Y(12) signaling by combining aspirin plus a potent P2Y(12) inhibitor (prasugrel or ticagrelor), the so called dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT), has represented the antithrombotic regimen of choice in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for nearly a decade. Nevertheless, the use of such antiplatelet treatment regimen, while reduced the risk of thrombotic complications, it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding and this risk may outweigh the benefit of a reduction of ischemic events in specific subgroup of patients. In light of the adverse prognostic implications of a bleeding complication, there has been a great interest in the development of antiplatelet regimens aimed at reducing bleeding without any trade-off in ischemic events. The fact that the ischemic risk is highest in the early phase after an ACS while the risk of bleeding remains relatively stable over time has represented the rationale for the implementation of a more intense antithrombotic regimen early after an ACS, followed by a less intense antithrombotic regimen thereafter. This practice, known as a “de-escalation” strategy, represents one of the more promising approaches for personalization of antithrombotic therapy in ACS. In this review we discuss the rationale, appraise the evidence and provide practical recommendations on the use of a de-escalation strategy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with an ACS

    Role of platelet function and genetic testing in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

    No full text
    Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents the standard of care for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Increasing evidence indicates that a "one-size-fits-all" approach with the use of a standard DAPT regimen for all patients undergoing PCI could lead to either suboptimal efficacy or prohibitively high bleeding in specific cohorts of patients. Moreover, the broad interindividual variability in response to P2Y12 inhibitors can impact outcomes and resource utilization. Among the strategies proposed to provide a more balanced trade-off between bleeding and ischemic events at a single patient level, a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibitors, by using platelet function or genetic testing, has shown promising results. In this review, we provide a focused summary of the rationale and evidence on the use of platelet function and genetic testing-guided antiplatelet therapy, and we explore the implications for their use in the modern setting of patients undergoing PCI

    Efficacy and safety of dual-pathway inhibition in patients with cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis of 49 802 patients from 7 randomized trials

    No full text
    Aims Low-dose (LD) direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in adjunct to antiplatelet therapy, known as dual-pathway inhibition (DPI), have been tested to prevent ischaemic events in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the overall safety and efficacy of LD DOACs vs placebo on a background of antiplatelet therapy. Methods and results All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LD DOAC (defined as a dosage below the lowest approved for stroke prevention) vs placebo among patients with CVD receiving single or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in at least 50% of the population and followed for at least 6 months, were included. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to overcome different follow-up durations across trials. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint major bleeding. A pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed for different DOAC-dose regimens. A total of 49 802 patients from 7 RCTs were included. Low-dose DOACs vs placebo were associated with significant reductions in MACE (IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.91, number needed to treat, NNT, 86) and myocardial infarction (IRR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95, NNT 355) and significant increases of major (IRR 2.05, 95% CI 1.50-2.80, number needed to harm, NNH, 89) or all bleeding (IRR 1.82, 95% CI 1.49-2.22, NNH 23). Cardiovascular death (IRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.03, NNT 784), intracranial (IRR 1.18, 95% CI 0.71-1.96, NNH 1810), and fatal bleeding (IRR 1.13, 95% CI 0.76-1.69, NNH 3170) did not differ significantly between strategies. Non-significant reductions of all-cause death (IRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80-1.01, NNT 821) and stroke (IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.01, NNT 315) favoured LD DOACs. Meta-regression analyses showed a significant interaction between percentage of DAPT use and increased risk of major bleeding (P = 0.04), intracranial haemorrhage (P = 0.035), and stroke (P = 0.0003). Subgroup analysis of very LD DOAC, defined as <= 1/3 of the lowest approved dose for stroke prevention (i.e. rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily) seemed to mitigate the risk of bleeding without any trade-off in efficacy compared to other LD DOAC regimens. Conclusions In patients with CVD, LD DOAC vs placebo on a background of antiplatelet therapy, reduced ischaemic events at the expense of increased major and all bleeding, but without significantly increasing intracranial or fatal bleeds, while the reduction of cardiovascular or total mortality and stroke was not statistically significant. A DPI with very LD DOAC (i.e. rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily) appeared particularly advantageous, especially when combined with a single antiplatelet agent and used among patients at high ischaemic and low bleeding risk. Study registration This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021232744)
    corecore