Safety and Efficacy of Triple Therapy With Ticagrelor or Prasugrel Versus Clopidogrel After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

2021 ◽  
pp. 107424842110314
Author(s):  
Kristina Gill ◽  
Nicholas Servati ◽  
Julie Flahive ◽  
Kyle Fraielli
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Antithrombotic Therapy ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Clinical Event ◽  
P2y12 Inhibitors ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation ◽  
Triple Antithrombotic Therapy

Background: Patients on dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention often have indications for concomitant oral anticoagulation, known as triple antithrombotic therapy. Majority of literature evaluating triple antithrombotic therapy fails to adequately represent patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and those prescribed potent P2Y12 inhibitors, ticagrelor or prasugrel. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of triple antithrombotic regimens containing ticagrelor or prasugrel versus clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention in the setting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort trial. The primary endpoint was net adverse clinical event, defined as the primary efficacy endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accident and the primary safety endpoint of any bleeding event. Results: Between October 2017 and October 2019, a total of 65 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were initiated on triple therapy. Forty-six patients were included in the primary analysis, of which 26 were discharged on triple antithrombotic therapy with clopidogrel and 20 discharged on potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor or prasugrel). The primary endpoint occurred in 27% of the clopidogrel group and 40% of the potent P2Y12 inhibitor group ( P = 0.35). Bleeding occurred in 23% of the clopidogrel group and 35% of the potent P2Y12 inhibitor group ( P = 0.37). Conclusions: This small cohort study suggests, in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the net adverse clinical event rate does not differ between clopidogrel and potent P2Y12 inhibitors in the setting of triple antithrombotic therapy. The results of this exploratory analysis warrant confirmation in a larger, randomized study.

scholarly journals Bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 492-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Erlinge ◽  
Sasha Koul ◽  
Elmir Omerovic ◽  
Ole Fröbert ◽  
Rikard Linder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
St Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
P2y12 Inhibitors ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation

Background: The optimal anti-coagulation strategy for patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention is unclear in contemporary clinical practice of radial access and potent P2Y12-inhibitors. The aim of this study was to investigate whether bivalirudin was superior to heparin monotherapy in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction without routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use. Methods: In a large pre-specified subgroup of the multicentre, prospective, randomised, registry-based, open-label clinical VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial we randomised patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel, to bivalirudin or heparin monotherapy with no planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was the rate of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding within 180 days. Results: A total of 3001 patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, were enrolled. The primary endpoint occurred in 12.1% (182 of 1503) and 12.5% (187 of 1498) of patients in the bivalirudin and heparin groups, respectively (hazard ratio of bivalirudin compared to heparin treatment 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.78–1.18, p=0.69). The results were consistent in all major subgroups. All-cause death occurred in 2.0% versus 1.7% (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.68–1.94, p=0.61), myocardial infarction in 2.3% versus 2.5% (hazard ratio 0.91, 0.58–1.45, p=0.70), major bleeding in 8.9% versus 9.1% (hazard ratio 0.97, 0.77–1.24, p=0.82) and definite stent thrombosis in 0.3% versus 0.2% (hazard ratio 1.33, 0.30–5.93, p=0.82). Conclusion: Bivalirudin as compared to heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction did not reduce the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients receiving current recommended treatments with modern P2Y12-inhibitors and predominantly radial access.

Optimum Therapies for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Managed with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Bruce R Brodie ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Great Majority ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Elevation Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Stent Deployment ◽  
Aspiration Thrombectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
St Elevation

This article reviews optimum therapies for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Optimum anti-thrombotic therapy includes aspirin, bivalirudin and the new anti-platelet agents prasugrel or ticagrelor. Stent thrombosis (ST) has been a major concern but can be reduced by achieving optimal stent deployment, use of prasugrel or ticagrelor, selective use of drug-eluting stents (DES) and use of new generation DES. Large thrombus burden is often associated poor outcomes. Patients with moderate to large thrombus should be managed with aspiration thrombectomy and patients with giant thrombus should be treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and may require rheolytic thrombectomy. The great majority of STEMI patients presenting at non-PCI hospitals can best be managed with transfer for primary PCI even with substantial delays. A small group of patients who present very early, who are at high clinical risk and have long delays to PCI, may best be treated with a pharmaco-invasive strategy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document