scholarly journals Clopidogrel Loading Dose 300 vs. 600 mg in Patients Undergoing One-Stop Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: A Prospective Single-Center Randomized Pilot Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yulin Guo ◽  
Dongjie Li ◽  
Yingdi Gao ◽  
Jing Zhao ◽  
Xiangguang An ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Loading Dose ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
One Stop ◽  
Hybrid Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Background: The optimal loading dose of clopidogrel in one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) remains an “evidence-free” zone. This study aimed to compare the major bleeding and ischemic thrombotic events between different clopidogrel loading doses (300 vs. 600 mg) in one-stop HCR.Methods: In this prospective, single-center, randomized, and parallel pilot study, 100 patients receiving one-stop HCR were randomly assigned to the clopidogrel loading dose 300-mg group or 600-mg group in a 1:1 ratio. Major bleeding events and composite in-hospital ischemic thrombotic and adverse complications were evaluated after the procedure.Results: The results showed that postoperative mean chest drainage of the first 4 days and total drainage were comparable between the two groups. No differences were found in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) related bleeding (4 vs. 2%, P = 1), PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) life-threatening bleeding (20 vs. 26%, P = 0.48), and PLATO major bleeding (70 vs. 76%, P = 0.5) in the two groups. The composite ischemic thrombotic and adverse events were also similar.Conclusions: In patients receiving one-stop HCR, clopidogrel 600 mg loading dose did not increase major bleeding events compared with 300 mg. More sufficient data is necessary to evaluate the potential benefits of 600 mg loading dose in one-stop HCR.

P5544Antiplatelet effects of intraoperative administration of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients undergoing one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization: a single-center randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Q Zhang ◽  
H Y Xu ◽  
Y J Wu
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Graft Patency ◽  
Loading Dose ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Adverse Cardiac Events ◽  
One Stop ◽  
Hybrid Coronary Revascularization

Abstract Background “One-stop” hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) has emerged to be a reliable and attractive alternative for selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. However, the optimal antiplatelet regimen of this procedure still remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare antiplatelet effect between ticagrelor and clopidogrel during this hybrid procedure. Purpose The study objective was to evaluate the onset of platelet inhibition between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in patients during “one-stop” HCR. Methods In a single-center, randomized, open-label study, 60 patients receiving one-stop HCR were randomized equally to received either clopidogrel (300 mg loading dose, 75 mg once per day), or ticagrelor (90 mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily) after confirmation of LIMA-LAD graft patency. All patients treated with aspirin 100mg once daily during the treatment period. Platelet reaction units (PRU) was assessed by Verify Now™ P2Y12 assay before surgery; after confirmation of LIMA-LAD graft patency before administration study drugs; and at 30 minutes, 1 hour, 2 hours, 6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours after loading dose. Major adverse cardiac events and bleeding events within a year follow-up were recorded. Results Ticagrelor produced further suppression of platelet aggregation in patients undergoing “one-stop” HCR from 2 hours after loading dose (PRU 271.0±51.6 vs 313.2±61.2, P=0.008). The average PRU value was still better at 24 hours after loading dose in the ticagrelor group than in the clopidogrel group (121.1±75.5 vs 284.3±67.0, P<0.001). There were no differences of bleeding or major adverse cardiac events between two groups. PRU value at various time points T C T vs C, P BS 272.7±48.5 275.5±60.4 0.842 BA 321.4±50.0 324.6±60.2 0.823 0.5 h 335.5±50.7 334.47±58.9 0.940 1 h 309.9±45.3 319.6±64.6 0.503 2 h 271.2±57.6 313.2±61.2 0.008 6 h 215.9±57.5 291.5±56.2 <0.001 12 h 196.9±80.1 295.4±62.8 <0.001 24 h 121.1±75.5 284.3±67.0 <0.001 PRU = platelet reation units; T = ticagrelor; C = clopidogrel; BS = before surgery; BA = before administration (after confrimation of left internal mammal artery graft patency). The trial flow diagram Conclusions In patients receiving “one-stop” HCR, the onset of action was fater and higher with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel. Acknowledgement/Funding This study was funded by AstraZeneca (China) Co, Ltd.

scholarly journals Intermediate vs Standard-dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to ICU: Ninety-day Results from the INSPIRATION Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behnood Bikdeli ◽  
Azita H Talasaz ◽  
Farid Rashidi ◽  
Hooman Bakhshandeh ◽  
Farnaz Rafiee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Arterial Thrombosis ◽  
Dose Group ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
Prophylactic Anticoagulation ◽  
Intermediate Dose

Background: Thrombotic complications are considered among the main extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. The optimal type and duration of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy in these patients remain unknown. Methods: This manuscript reports the final (90-day) results of the Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) study. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care were randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation for 30 days, irrespective of hospital discharge status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause death. The main safety outcome was major bleeding. Results: Of 600 randomized patients, 562 entered the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median age [Q1, Q3]; 62 (50, 71) years; 237 (42.2%) women), of whom 336 (59.8%) survived to hospital discharge. The primary outcome occurred in 132 (47.8%) of patients assigned to intermediate-dose and 130 (45.4%) patients assigned to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.55, P=0.11). No significant differences were observed between the two groups for other efficacy outcomes, or in the landmark analysis from days 31-90. Overall, there were 7 (2.5%) major bleeding events in the intermediate-dose group (including 3 fatal events) and 4 (1.4%) major bleeding events in the standard-dose group (none fatal) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.53-6.24, P=0.33). Conclusion: Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce a composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous or arterial thrombosis at 90-day follow-up.

Aspirin I.V. Loading during Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Pharmacology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
David Naguib ◽  
Carolin Helten ◽  
Saif Zako ◽  
Philipp Mourikis ◽  
René M’Pembele ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Light Transmission ◽  
Platelet Reactivity ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Loading Dose ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
The Impact

Additional loading dose of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) despite permanent oral ASA medication is frequently applicated. The impact on platelet reactivity and clinical events is not known. In this pilot study, we aimed to analyze high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to aspirin in patients undergoing elective PCI. Platelet reactivity was measured using light-transmission aggregometry in 100 patients on permanent low-dose ASA medication undergoing elective PCI. Platelet reactivity measured by arachidonic acid-induced maximum of aggregation (MoA) in patients with versus without additional peri-procedural ASA loading (500 mg i.v.) was compared. HTPR was defined as MoA &#x3e;20% for ASA. Major adverse cerebro- and cardiovascular events (MACCEs) and bleeding events were evaluated during hospital course. HTPR rate was similar in both groups (HTPR to ASA: loading vs. control 6% vs. 16%, odds ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08–1.35, <i>p</i> = 0.12). In-hospital MACCEs were not different between groups (MACCE: loading vs. control: 0 vs. 0 patient, OR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.03–67.95, <i>p</i> = 0.89). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction minimal bleedings were numerically higher in patients without ASA loading dose. In this pharmacodynamic pilot study, additional ASA loading did not reduce HTPR to ASA. Furthermore, ASA loading did not increase in-hospital MACCE and bleeding complications.

A Systematic Review of Anticoagulation Strategies for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in Critical Care.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Jayne Nelson ◽  
Brian W Johnston ◽  
Alicia Achiaa Charlotte Waite ◽  
Gedeon Lemma ◽  
Ingeborg Dorothea Welters
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Thromboembolic Events ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Anticoagulated Patients

Background. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in critically ill patients. There is a paucity of data assessing the impact of anticoagulation strategies on clinical outcomes for general critical care patients with AF. Our aim was to assess the existing literature to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies used in critical care for AF. Methodology. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and PubMed databases. Studies reporting anticoagulation strategies for AF in adults admitted to a general critical care setting were assessed for inclusion. Results. Four studies were selected for data extraction. A total of 44087 patients were identified with AF, of which 17.8-49.4% received anticoagulation. The reported incidence of thromboembolic events was 0-1.4% for anticoagulated patients, and 0-1.3% in non-anticoagulated patients. Major bleeding events were reported in three studies and occurred in 7.2-8.6% of the anticoagulated patients and up to 7.1% of the non-anticoagulated patients. Conclusions. There was an increased incidence of major bleeding events in anticoagulated patients with AF in critical care compared to non-anticoagulated patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of reported thromboembolic events within studies, between patients who did and did not receive anticoagulation. However, the outcomes reported within studies were not standardised, therefore, the generalisability of our results to the general critical care population remains unclear. Further data is required to facilitate an evidence-based assessment of the risks and benefits of anticoagulation for critically ill patients with AF.

Clinical Outcomes after Hybrid Coronary Revascularization versus Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 299-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Vassiliades ◽  
Patrick D. Kilgo ◽  
John S. Douglas ◽  
Vasilis C. Babaliaros ◽  
Peter C. Block ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Left Internal Mammary Artery ◽  
Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Artery Bypass ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Off Pump ◽  
Internal Mammary ◽  
Hybrid Coronary Revascularization ◽  
Pump Coronary Artery Bypass ◽  
Hybrid Group

Objective Hybrid coronary revascularization is offered as an alternative strategy for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). We present our experience and provide a comparative analysis to off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB). Methods Ninety-one patients with multivessel CAD underwent minimally invasive left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending grafting in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention of nonleft anterior descending targets (HYBRID). The primary end point of this study was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as death, stroke, and nonfatal myocardial infarction. MACCE in the HYBRID group were compared with 4175 contemporaneously performed OPCAB operations by logistic (30-day outcomes) and Cox proportional hazards (long-term survival) regression methods. Propensity scoring was used to adjust for potential selection bias. Results The 30-day MACCE (death/stroke/nonfatal myocardial infarction) rate was 1.1% for the HYBRID group (0%/0%/1.1%) and 3.0% for the OPCAB group (1.8%/1.1%/0.5%) (odds ratio = 0.47, P = 0.48). Angiographic left internal mammary artery evaluation was obtained in 95.6% of patients (87 of 91) revealing FitzGibbon A patency in 98.0% (96 of 98). The reintervention rate at 1 year for the HYBRID group was 5.5% (5 of 91) and was limited to repeat percutaneous coronary intervention. Three-year survival was statistically similar for the two groups (hazard ratio = 0.44, P = 0.18, see Kaplan-Meier figure). Conclusions Hybrid coronary revascularization may be noninferior to OPCAB with respect to early MACCE and 3-year survival in the treatment of multivessel CAD.

Assessing the management of major bleeding events in patients treated by direct oral anticoagulant in an emergency department

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 315-324
Author(s):  
Julien Durand ◽  
Stéphanie Parat ◽  
Jean-Christophe Lega ◽  
Yessim Dargaud ◽  
Véronique Potinet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulant ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document