| 1. |
- Cannon, Christopher P., et al.
(författare)
-
Design and Rationale of the RE-DUAL PCI Trial : A Prospective, Randomized, Phase 3b Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Dual Antithrombotic Therapy With Dabigatran Etexilate Versus Warfarin Triple Therapy in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Who Have Undergone Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stenting
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 39:10, s. 555-564
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing coronary stenting is complicated by the need for anticoagulant therapy for stroke prevention and dual antiplatelet therapy for prevention of stent thrombosis and coronary events. Triple antithrombotic therapy, typically comprising warfarin, aspirin, and clopidogrel, is associated with a high risk of bleeding. A modest-sized trial of oral anticoagulation with warfarin and clopidogrel without aspirin showed improvements in both bleeding and thrombotic events compared with triple therapy, but large trials are lacking. The RE-DUAL PCI trial (NCT 02164864) is a phase 3b, a strategy of prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial. The main objective is to evaluate dual antithrombotic therapy with dabigatran etexilate (110 or 150 mg twice daily) and a P2Y12 inhibtor (either clopidogrel or ticagrelor) compared with triple antithrombotic therapy with warfarin, a P2Y12 inhibtor (either clopidogrel or ticagrelor, and low-dose aspirin (for 1 or 3 months, depending on stent type) in nonvalvular AF patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. The primary endpoint is time to first International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis major bleeding event or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event. Secondary endpoints are the composite of all cause death or thrombotic events (myocardial infarction, or stroke/systemic embolism) and unplanned revascularization; death or thrombotic events; individual outcome events; death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and unplanned revascularization. A hierarchical procedure for multiple testing will be used. The plan is to randomize similar to 2500 patients at approximately 550 centers worldwide to try to identify new treatment strategies for this patient population.
|
|
| 2. |
- Golwala, Harsh B., et al.
(författare)
-
Safety and efficacy of dual vs. triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention : a systematic review andmeta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:19, s. 1726-
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: Of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), approximately 10% undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We studied the safety and efficacy of dual vs. triple antithrombotic therapy (DAT vs. TAT) in this population.Methods and results: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, Embase, EBSCO, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Web of Science, and relevant meeting abstracts for Phase 3, randomized trials that compared DAT vs. TAT in patients with AF following PCI. Four trials including 5317 patients were included, of whom 3039 (57%) received DAT. Compared with the TAT arm, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding showed a reduction by 47% in the DAT arm [4.3% vs. 9.0%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.36–0.85, I2 = 42.9%]. In addition, there was no difference in the trial-defined major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (10.4% vs. 10.0%, HR 0.85, 95% CrI 0.48–1.29, I2 = 58.4%), or in individual outcomes of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke between the two arms.Conclusion: Compared with TAT, DAT shows a reduction in TIMI major or minor bleeding by 47% with comparable outcomes of MACE. Our findings support the concept that DAT may be a better option than TAT in many patients with AF following PCI.
|
|
| 3. |
- Shimada, Yuichi J., et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors on the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes : Analysis from the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) Trial
- 2016
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 177, s. 1-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Ticagrelor reduced cardiovascular events compared with clopidogrel in PLATO without increasing overall major bleeding. We evaluated whether the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) impacts the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel. Methods PLATO randomized 18,624 subjects with acute coronary syndrome to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. The primary efficacy end point was cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke, and the primary safety end point was major bleeding. The use of GPI was at the physician's discretion and open-label. We evaluated outcomes at 30 days stratified by GPI use in the subgroup of 9,983 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 72 hours. Results A total of 4,020 (40%) received a GPI. Those receiving a GPI were more likely to be younger, be male, and undergo multivessel PCI. There was no interaction between treatment and GPI use for the primary efficacy and safety end points. Patients treated without GPI had a lower rate of definite stent thrombosis and higher rate of minor/major bleeding with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel (P<.05), whereas there was no such difference with GPI (P interaction <.05). Conclusions In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing early PCI, the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel were not modified by GPI use according to the primary efficacy and safety end point of the trial, although there were indications of greater benefit on definite stent thrombosis and more major or minor bleeding with ticagrelor in patients without (vs with) GPI treatment.
|
|
