| 1. |
- De Caterina, Raffaele, et al.
(författare)
-
Oral anticoagulants in coronary heart disease (Section IV) Position paper of the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis - Task Force on Anticoagulants in Heart Disease
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Thrombosis and Haemostasis. - 0340-6245 .- 2567-689X. ; 115:4, s. 685-711
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Until recently, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) were the only available oral anticoagulants evaluated for long-term treatment of patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), particularly after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Despite efficacy in this setting, VKAs are rarely used because they are cumbersome to administer. Instead, the more readily manageable antiplatelet agents are the mainstay of prevention in ACS patients. This situation has the potential to change with the introduction of non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs), which are easier to administer than VKAs because they can be given in fixed doses without routine coagulation monitoring. The NOACs include dabigatran, which inhibits thrombin, and apixaban, rivaroxaban and edoxaban, which inhibit factor Xa. Apixaban and rivaroxaban were evaluated in phase III trials for prevention of recurrent ischaemia in ACS patients, most of whom were also receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. Although at the doses tested rivaroxaban was effective and apixaban was not, both agents increased major bleeding. The role for the NOACs in ACS management, although promising, is therefore complicated, because it is uncertain how they compare with newer antiplatelet agents, such as prasugrel, ticagrelor or vorapaxar, and because their safety in combination with these other drugs is unknown. Ongoing studies are also now evaluating the use of NOACs in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients, where their role is established, with coexistent ACS or coronary stenting. Focusing on CHD, we review the results of clinical trials with the NOACs and provide a perspective on their future incorporation into clinical practice.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Patrono, Carlo, et al.
(författare)
-
Antiplatelet agents for the treatment and prevention of atherothrombosis
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 32:23, s. 2922-32
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The clinical pharmacology of antiplatelet drugs has been reviewed previously by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Task force and by the 8th American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Moreover, information on the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet drugs in the treatment and prevention of atherothrombosis is provided by collaborative meta-analyses of 287 secondary prevention trials and 6 primary prevention trials. The present document intends to provide practicing physicians with an updated instrument to guide their choice of the most suitable antiplatelet strategy for the individual patient at risk, or with different clinical manifestations, of atherothrombosis.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bhatt, Deepak L., et al.
(författare)
-
Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the effect of ticagrelor on health outcomes in diabetes mellitus patients Intervention study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 42:5, s. 498-505
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the setting of prior myocardial infarction, the oral antiplatelet ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced the risk of recurrent ischemic events, especially, in those with diabetes mellitus. Patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes are also at elevated risk and might benefit from dual antiplatelet therapy. The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS, NCT01991795) is a Phase 3b randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of ticagrelor vs placebo, on top of low dose aspirin. Patients >= 50 years with type 2 diabetes receiving anti-diabetic medications for at least 6 months with stable coronary artery disease as determined by a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention, bypass grafting, or angiographic stenosis of >= 50% of at least one coronary artery were enrolled. Patients with known prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety endpoint is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. A total of 19 220 patients worldwide have been randomized and at least 1385 adjudicated primary efficacy endpoint events are expected to be available for analysis, with an expected average follow-up of 40 months (maximum 58 months). Most of the exposure is on a 60 mg twice daily dose, as the dose was lowered from 90 mg twice daily partway into the study. The results may revise the boundaries of efficacy for dual antiplatelet therapy and whether it has a role outside acute coronary syndromes, prior myocardial infarction, or percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
| 5. |
- Huber, Kurt, et al.
(författare)
-
Antiplatelet and anticoagulation agents in acute coronary syndromes : What is the current status and what does the future hold?
- 2014
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 168:5, s. 611-621
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Mortality and morbidity in acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), caused principally by plaque erosion or rupture leading to thrombus formation and myocardial ischemia, have been reduced by a combination of antithrombotic agents (antiplatelet drugs and anticoagulants) and early revascularization. Aspirin is the foundation antiplatelet agent. New P2Y(12) receptor inhibitors (prasugrel and ticagrelor) have clear benefits compared with clopidogrel for dual antiplatelet therapy, and cangrelor or vorapaxar, a thrombin receptor inhibitor, may be of value in specific settings. Anticoagulation uses 1 of 4 choices: bivalirudin, unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, and fondaparinux. Moreover, some patients (such as those who have chronic atrial fibrillation) require triple therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel, plus an anticoagulant, frequently a vitamin K antagonist. New oral anticoagulants have been shown to be at least as effective as vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation and led to fewer bleeding complications. Finally, the combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and low-dose rivaroxaban has recently been approved by the European Medicines Agency (but not the Food and Drug Administration) for secondary prevention after ACS. Several strategies have been developed to balance the potential benefit of antithrombotic therapy against the risk of bleeding complications, for example, radial access in coronary angiography or restricted use of combination therapy, and others are under investigation, such as discontinuation of aspirin. This overview summarizes the current status of antithrombotic therapy in ACS and describes strategies currently explored to optimize its benefit/risk ratio.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Sejr-Hansen, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for Immediate Assessment of Non-Culprit Lesions in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction An iSTEMI Substudy
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 72:13, s. B248-B249
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based approach for in-procedure functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of QFR with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in non-culprit lesions (NCLs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and with staged fractional flow reserve (FFR) as reference standard.METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. All NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 19 days) follow-up. QFR (Medis Medical Imaging bv., The Netherlands) was computed for all analyzable NCLs in a core lab by an investigator blinded to iFR and FFR results. Diagnostic cut-off values were 0.80 for QFR, 0.89 for iFR, and 0.80 for FFR.RESULTS: A total of 156 NCLs in 120 patients were included in the iSTEMI study. Paired iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCls in 112 patients. Of these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71 %) lesions assessed in the acute setting. Mean acute QFR was 0.800.13, acute iFR was 0.860.12, and staged FFR was 0.800.11. With staged FFR as reference standard, diagnostic accuracy was 84% (95%CI: 76-90) for acute QFR and 73% (95%CI: 66-83) for acute iFR (p¼0.09), area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.82-0.95) vs. 0.77 (95%CI: 0.68-0.87) (p¼0.02), sensitivity was 83% (95%CI: 69-92) vs. 85% (95%CI: 73-92) (p¼0.79), specificity was 84% (95%CI: 72-92) vs. 64% (95%CI: 53-75) (p¼0.11), positive predictive value was 81% (95%CI: 57-82) vs. 70% (95%CI: 57-82)(p¼0.06), and negative predictive value was 86% (95%CI: 76-95) vs. 84% (95%CI: 69-91)(p¼0.37), for acute QFR and acute iFR, respectively.CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of acute QFR in post hocevaluation of NCLs in STEMI patients was at least similar to acuteassessment by iFR with staged procedure FFR as reference. QFR couldprovide an easy, safe and cost-effective solution to evaluate NCLs inthe acute phase, thus potentially reducing the number of unnecessaryfollow-up procedures.CATEGORIES IMAGING: Physiologic Lesion Assessment.
|
|
| 8. |
- Sejr-Hansen, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Quantitative flow ratio for immediate assessment of nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction—An iSTEMI substudy
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. - : Wiley. - 1522-1946 .- 1522-726X. ; 94:5, s. 686-692
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) assessment of nonculprit lesions (NCLs) based on acute setting angiograms obtained in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with QFR, fractional flow reserve (FFR), and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in the staged setting as reference. Background: QFR is an angiography-based approach for the functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 13 days) follow-up. Acute and staged QFR values were computed in a core laboratory based on the coronary angiography recordings. Diagnostic cut-off values were ≤0.80 for QFR and FFR, and ≤0.89 for iFR. Results: Staged iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCLs in 112 patients in the iSTEMI study. Among these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71%) lesions assessed in the acute setting with a mean QFR value of 0.82 (IQR: 0.73–0.91). Staged QFR, FFR, and iFR were 0.80 (IQR: 0.70–0.90), 0.81 (IQR: 0.71–0.88), and 0.91 (IQR: 0.87–0.96), respectively. Classification agreement of acute and staged QFR was 93% (95%Cl: 87–99). The classification agreement of acute QFR was 84% (95%CI: 76–90) using staged FFR as reference and 74% (95%CI: 65–83) using staged iFR as reference. Conclusions: Acute QFR showed a very good diagnostic performance with staged QFR as reference, a good diagnostic performance with staged FFR as reference, and a moderate diagnostic performance with staged iFR as reference.
|
|
| 9. |
- Thim, Troels, et al.
(författare)
-
Agreement between iFR and FFR in staged follow-up evaluation of non-culprit stenoses after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (iSTEMI substudy)
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 70:18, s. B91-B91
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Classification agreement between instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) is approximately 80% in stable patients. It was recently shown that FFR guidance, as compared to iFR guidance, was associated with a higher risk of subsequent revascularization among patients with non- ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The classification agreement, and the impact of time interval, between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been described.METHODS: The iSTEMI study assessed agreement between iFR across non-culprit stenoses at the index procedure in patients with STEMI versus iFR and FFR at a follow-up angiography. The interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation was at the discretion of the treating physicians. In this substudy, classification agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR was evaluated within groups defined according to follow-up time point after STEMI, i.e., <5days, 5-15days, and16 days. iFR<0.90 and FFR0.80 were considered hemodynamically significant.RESULTS: Among 120 patients with 157 non-culprit stenoses, follow-up iFR and FFR was available in 112 patients with 146 non-culprit stenoses. Median follow-up interval was 16 days (IQR 5-32 days). The overall classification agreement was 84%. With follow-up<5days after STEMI, there was classification agreement between iFR and FFR was in 27 of 35 (77%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 5-15 after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 33 of 38 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 16 days after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 63 of 73 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. The observed differences in these proportions over time after STEMI were not statistically significant (<5versus5days, p¼0.19).CONCLUSION: Overall, classification agreement between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after STEMI was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR, although the observed differences were not statistically significant.
|
|
| 10. |
- Thim, Troels, et al.
(författare)
-
Agreement between nonculprit stenosis follow-up iFR and FFR after STEMI (iSTEMI substudy)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMC Research Notes. - : BioMed Central. - 1756-0500. ; 13:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To evaluate agreement between instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) for the functional assessment of nonculprit coronary stenoses at staged follow-up after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).RESULTS: We measured iFR and FFR at staged follow-up in 112 STEMI patients with 146 nonculprit stenoses. Median interval between STEMI and follow-up was 16 (interquartile range 5-32) days. Agreement between iFR and FFR was 77% < 5 days after STEMI and 86% after ≥ 5 days (p = 0.19). Among cases with disagreement, the proportion of cases with hemodynamically significant iFR and non-significant FFR were different when assessed < 5 days (5 in 8, 63%) versus ≥ 5 days (3 in 15, 20%) after STEMI (p = 0.04). Overall classification agreement between iFR and FFR was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between iFR and FFR.
|
|
