1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
|
|
4. |
- Wijns, W, et al.
(author)
-
Myocardial revascularization
- 2011
-
In: REVISTA PORTUGUESA DE CARDIOLOGIA. - : Elsevier BV. - 0870-2551 .- 2174-2049. ; 30:12, s. 951-1005
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|
11. |
|
|
12. |
|
|
13. |
- Anand, Sonia S, et al.
(author)
-
Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable peripheral or carotid artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
- 2018
-
In: Lancet (London, England). - 1474-547X. ; 391:10117, s. 219-229
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications.This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle-brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we enrolled 7470 patients with peripheral artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (126 [5%] of 2492 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·90, p=0·0047), and major adverse limb events including major amputation (32 [1%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·54 95% CI 0·35-0·82, p=0·0037). Rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day compared with aspirin alone did not significantly reduce the composite endpoint (149 [6%] of 2474 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·69-1·08, p=0·19), but reduced major adverse limb events including major amputation (40 [2%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12-2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17-2·40; p=0·0043).Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding.Bayer AG.
|
|
14. |
- Borja, I, et al.
(author)
-
Corrigendum
- 2018
-
In: European heart journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1522-9645 .- 0195-668X. ; 39:21, s. 1991-1991
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
15. |
|
|
16. |
|
|
17. |
|
|
18. |
|
|
19. |
|
|
20. |
- Bhatt, Deepak L., et al.
(author)
-
Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the effect of ticagrelor on health outcomes in diabetes mellitus patients Intervention study
- 2019
-
In: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 42:5, s. 498-505
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
21. |
|
|
22. |
- Connolly, Stuart J, et al.
(author)
-
Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable coronary artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
- 2018
-
In: Lancet (London, England). - 1474-547X. ; 391:10117, s. 205-218
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease.In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 27395 patients were enrolled to the COMPASS trial, of whom 24824 patients had stable coronary artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced the primary outcome more than aspirin alone (347 [4%] of 8313 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·65-0·86, p<0·0001). By comparison, treatment with rivaroxaban alone did not significantly improve the primary outcome when compared with treatment with aspirin alone (411 [5%] of 8250 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·02, p=0·094). Combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin treatment resulted in more major bleeds than treatment with aspirin alone (263 [3%] of 8313 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·66, 95% CI 1·37-2·03, p<0·0001), and similarly, more bleeds were seen in the rivaroxaban alone group than in the aspirin alone group (236 [3%] of 8250 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·51, 95% CI 1·23-1·84, p<0·0001). The most common site of major bleeding was gastrointestinal, occurring in 130 [2%] patients who received combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin, in 84 [1%] patients who received rivaroxaban alone, and in 61 [1%] patients who received aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced mortality when compared with aspirin alone (262 [3%] of 8313 vs 339 [4%] of 8261; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·90, p=0·0012).In patients with stable coronary artery disease, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin lowered major vascular events, but increased major bleeding. There was no significant increase in intracranial bleeding or other critical organ bleeding. There was also a significant net benefit in favour of rivaroxaban plus aspirin and deaths were reduced by 23%. Thus, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity and mortality from coronary artery disease worldwide.Bayer AG.
|
|
23. |
- Halim, Sharif A., et al.
(author)
-
Frequency, clinical and angiographic characteristics, and outcomes of high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes patients with left circumflex culprit lesions
- 2016
-
In: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 203, s. 708-713
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The relationship between culprit vessel, infarct size, and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS) is unclear. In some reports, the left circumflex artery (LCX) was more often the culprit at angiography than the right coronary artery (RCA) or left anterior descending artery (LAD), and infarcts were larger with LCX culprits. Methods: We determined culprit vessel frequency and initial patency (TIMI flow grade), median fold elevation of peak troponin above the upper limit of normal, and outcomes (30-day death or myocardial infarction [MI] and 1-year mortality) by culprit vessel in high-risk NSTE ACS patients in the EARLY ACS trial. Results: Of 9406 patients, 2066 (22.0%) had angiographic core laboratory data. We evaluated 1774 patients for whom the culprit artery was not the left main, a bypass graft, or branch vessel. The culprit was the LCX in 560 (31.6%), LAD in 653 (36.8%), and RCA in 561 (31.6%) patients. There were fewer women (24.1%) and more prior MI (25.5%) among patients with a culprit LCX compared with those with a culprit LAD or RCA. Patients with LCX (21.2%) and RCA (27.5%) culprits more often had an occluded artery (TIMI 0/1) than did those with LAD (11.3%). Peak troponin elevation was significantly higher for LCX than RCA or LAD culprits. LCX culprit vessels were not associated with worse 30-day or 1-year outcomes in adjusted models. Conclusions: Among patientswith NSTE ACS, the frequencies of LCX, LAD, and RCA culprits were similar. Although LCX lesions were associated with higher peak troponin levels, there was no difference in short-or intermediateterm outcomes by culprit artery.
|
|
24. |
- Harrington, Robert A., et al.
(author)
-
The Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRA.CER) trial : study design and rationale
- 2009
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 158:3, s. 327-334
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background The protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR-1), the main platelet receptor for thrombin, represents a novel target for treatment of arterial thrombosis, and SCH 530348 is an orally active, selective, competitive PAR-1 antagonist. We designed TRA.CER to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCH 530348 compared with placebo in addition to standard of care in patients with non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and high-risk features. Trial design TRA.CER is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III trial with an original estimated sample size of 10,000 subjects. Our primary objective is to demonstrate that SCH 530348 in addition to standard of care will reduce the incidence of the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, and urgent coronary revascularization compared with standard of care alone. Our key secondary objective is to determine whether SCH 530348 will reduce the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke compared with standard of care alone. Secondary objectives related to safety are the composite of moderate and severe GUSTO bleeding and clinically significant TIMI bleeding. The trial will continue until a predetermined minimum number of centrally adjudicated primary and key secondary end point events have occurred and all subjects have participated in the study for at least I year. The TRA.CER trial is part of the large phase III SCH 530348 development program that includes a concomitant evaluation in secondary prevention. Conclusion TRA.CER will define efficacy and safety of the novel platelet PAR-1 inhibitor SCH 530348 in the treatment of high-risk patients with NSTE ACS in the setting of current treatment strategies.
|
|
25. |
- Knot, J, et al.
(author)
-
How to set up an effective national primary angioplasty network : Lessons learned from five European countries
- 2009
-
In: EuroIntervention. - 1774-024X. ; 3:299, s. 301-309
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are used to treat acute and chronic forms of coronary artery disease. While in chronic forms the main goal of PCI is to improve the quality of life, in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) timely PCI is a life-saving procedure - especially in the setting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to describe the experience of countries with successful nationwide implementation of PCI in STEMI, and to provide general recommendations for other countries. METHODS AND RESULTS: The European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) recenty launched the Stent For Life Initiative (SFLI). The initial phase of this pan-European project was focused on the positive experience of five countries to provide the best practice examples. The Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Denmark and Austria were visited and the logistics of ACS treatment was studied. Public campaigns improved patient access to acute PCI. Regional networks involving emergency medical services (EMS), non-PCI hospitals and PCI centres are useful in providing access to acute PCI for most patients. Direct transfer from the first medical contact site to the cathlab is essential to minimise the time delays. Cathlab staff work is organised to provide acute PCI services 24 hours a day / seven days a week (24/7). Even in those regions where thrombolysis is still used due to long transfer distances to PCI, patients should still be transferred to a PCI centre (after thrombolysis). The highest risk non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction patients should undergo emergency coronary angiography within two hours of hospital admission, i.e. similar to STEMI patients. CONCLUSIONS: Three realistic goals for other countries were defined based on these experiences: 1) primary PCI should be used for >70% of all STEMI patients, 2) primary PCI rates should reach >600 per million inhabitants per year and 3) existing PCI centres should treat all their STEMI patients by primary PCI, i.e. should offer a 24/7 service
|
|
26. |
|
|
27. |
|
|
28. |
|
|
29. |
|
|
30. |
|
|
31. |
- Steg, P. Gabriel, et al.
(author)
-
Ticagrelor in Patients with Stable Coronary Disease and Diabetes
- 2019
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - : MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 381:14, s. 1309-1320
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes were randomly assigned to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. At 40 months, the incidence of the composite efficacy outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was lower with ticagrelor than with placebo; the frequency of major bleeding was higher with ticagrelor. Background Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus who have not had a myocardial infarction or stroke are at high risk for cardiovascular events. Whether adding ticagrelor to aspirin improves outcomes in this population is unclear. Methods In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who were 50 years of age or older and who had stable coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. Patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding as defined by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria. Results A total of 19,220 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Permanent treatment discontinuation was more frequent with ticagrelor than placebo (34.5% vs. 25.4%). The incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) was lower in the ticagrelor group than in the placebo group (7.7% vs. 8.5%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.99; P=0.04), whereas the incidence of TIMI major bleeding was higher (2.2% vs. 1.0%; hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.94; P<0.001), as was the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (0.7% vs. 0.5%; hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.48; P=0.005). There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.1%; hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.87 to 4.15; P=0.11). The incidence of an exploratory composite outcome of irreversible harm (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, fatal bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage) was similar in the ticagrelor group and the placebo group (10.1% vs. 10.8%; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.02). Conclusions In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, those who received ticagrelor plus aspirin had a lower incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events but a higher incidence of major bleeding than those who received placebo plus aspirin. (Funded by AstraZeneca; THEMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01991795.).
|
|
32. |
|
|
33. |
- Tricoci, Pierluigi, et al.
(author)
-
Thrombin-receptor antagonist vorapaxar in acute coronary syndromes
- 2012
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 366:1, s. 20-33
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND:Vorapaxar is a new oral protease-activated-receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation.METHODS:In this multinational, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization.RESULTS:Follow-up in the trial was terminated early after a safety review. After a median follow-up of 502 days (interquartile range, 349 to 667), the primary end point occurred in 1031 of 6473 patients receiving vorapaxar versus 1102 of 6471 patients receiving placebo (Kaplan-Meier 2-year rate, 18.5% vs. 19.9%; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.01; P=0.07). A composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 822 patients in the vorapaxar group versus 910 in the placebo group (14.7% and 16.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P=0.02). Rates of moderate and severe bleeding were 7.2% in the vorapaxar group and 5.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.58; P<0.001). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 1.1% and 0.2%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.78 to 6.45; P<0.001). Rates of nonhemorrhagic adverse events were similar in the two groups.CONCLUSIONS:In patients with acute coronary syndromes, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but significantly increased the risk of major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRACER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00527943.).
|
|
34. |
|
|