Ticagrelor vs clopidogrel when coadministered with bivalirudin in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

BackgroundThe optimal perioperative antithrombotic strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial. ObjectivesTo determine the safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin plus ticagrelor vs bivalirudin plus clopidogrel in patients with ACS undergoing PCI in the real world. MethodsBetween March 2016 and March 2019, 7234 patients with ACS who had undergone PCI, received bivalirudin periprocedurally, and were prescribed ticagrelor or clopidogrel were enrolled in a single-center, all-comer, modern, retrospective cohort study. Incidence rates of 12-month ischemia (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), all-cause death, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2,3,5 bleeding, and BARC type 3,5 bleeding were compared between different groups. ResultsIn total, 4960 patients received bivalirudin plus clopidogrel and 2274 patients received bivalirudin plus ticagrelor. Compared with bivalirudin plus clopidogrel, bivalirudin plus ticagrelor was associated with lower ischemic events (1.74% vs 2.84%; relative risk, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.91; P = .02) and stroke (0.05% vs 1.01%, P < .001) within 12 months after PCI without excessive risk of bleeding (BARC type 2,3,5 bleeding: 4.49% vs 3.76%, P = .22; BARC type 3,5 bleeding: 2.84% vs 2.02%, P = .08). The beneficial effects of bivalirudin plus ticagrelor were consistent among subgroups. ConclusionAs an initial treatment strategy, bivalirudin plus ticagrelor could reduce the 12-month risk of ischemic events compared with bivalirudin plus clopidogrel significantly without increasing the bleeding risk in ACS patients undergoing PCI.