Optimal Duration Of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Research Articles

Novel insights on dual antiplatelet therapy duration following stenting for angiography-detected moderate-to-severe calcified coronary lesions

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), comprising both aspirin and the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, is crucial in managing patients with coronary artery disease following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The optimal duration for DAPT in patients with angiography-detected moderate-to-severe calcified coronary (MSCC) lesions who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation remains uncertain. We recruited patients with angiography-detected MSCC lesions who received DES implantation from the prospective Fuwai Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry. Patients were classified into two groups according to the duration of DAPT: those with a DAPT duration of one year or less, and those with a DAPT duration of more than one year. The primary endpoint was the major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event, which was defined as composed of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The key-safety endpoint was bleeding type 2, 3, or 5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria. There were 1730 patients included in the study, and 470 (27.17 %) continued DAPT for more than one year after undergoing MSCC-PCI with DES implantation. The median follow-up time was 2.5 years. DAPT>1-year versus ≤1-year DAPT was significantly associated with a reduced risk of the primary outcome (1.59 % versus 3.19 %; adjusted hazard ratio=0.44; 95 % CI: 0.22–0.88). Similar trends were observed for all-cause death (0.16 % versus 1.91 %; P<0.001) and cardiovascular death (0.08 % versus 1.06 %; P=0.001). There was no significant difference in the key-safety endpoint between 2 regimens (1.75 % versus 0.85 %; adjusted hazard ratio=1.95; 95 % CI: 0.65–5.84). In conclusion, long-term DAPT after DES implantation in patients with MSCC lesions resulted in improved clinical outcomes at 2.5 years. This was achieved by reducing the risk of ischemia without increasing clinically significant bleeding.

Does one size really fit all? The case for personalized antiplatelet therapy in interventional cardiology.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death worldwide. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, is currently recommended as a default for patients after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, controversies arise over the role of aspirin, the optimal duration of DAPT after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the choice of P2Y12 inhibitor and the variability in individual responses to antiplatelet agents. Recent data indicate that monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor may have adequate anti-ischemic effects with lower bleeding risk. Additionally, discrepancies in DAPT duration recommendations and the optimal P2Y12 inhibitor, provides more uncertainty. We ask the question "does one size really fits all?" or should a more personalized strategy should be implemented.

Demystifying the Contemporary Role of 12-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome.

For almost two decades, 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been the only class I recommendation on DAPT in American and European guidelines, which has resulted in 12-month durations of DAPT therapy being the most frequently implemented in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across the globe. Twelve-month DAPT was initially grounded in the results of the CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events) trial, which, by design, studied DAPT versus no DAPT rather than the optimal DAPT duration. The average DAPT duration in this study was 9 months, not 12 months. Subsequent ACS studies, which were not designed to assess DAPT duration, rather its composition (aspirin with prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel) were further interpreted as supportive evidence for 12-month DAPT duration. In these studies, the median DAPT duration was 9 or 15 months for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively. Several subsequent studies questioned the 12-month regimen and suggested that DAPT duration should either be fewer than 12 months in patients at high bleeding risk or more than 12 months in patients at high ischemic risk who can safely tolerate the treatment. Bleeding, rather than ischemic risk assessment, has emerged as a treatment modifier for maximizing the net clinical benefit of DAPT, due to excessive bleeding and no clear benefit of prolonged treatment regimens in high bleeding risk patients. Multiple DAPT de-escalation treatment strategies, including switching from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel, reducing the dose of prasugrel or ticagrelor, and shortening DAPT duration while maintaining monotherapy with ticagrelor, have been consistently shown to reduce bleeding without increasing fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular or cerebral ischemic risks compared with 12-month DAPT. However, 12-month DAPT remains the only class-I DAPT recommendation for patients with ACS despite the lack of prospectively established evidence, leading to unnecessary and potentially harmful overtreatment in many patients. It is time for clinical practice and guideline recommendations to be updated to reflect the totality of the evidence regarding the optimal DAPT duration in ACS.

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Recent studies have shown similar safety and efficacy of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12i) monotherapy when compared with standard DAPT. However, the optimal DAPT duration and regimen in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention is still unclear. Online databases were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating P2Y12i monotherapy after short DAPT (≤3 months) versus standard DAPT (≥12 months) in ACS patients. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target-vessel revascularization, and major bleeding. Random-effects model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six randomized controlled trials with a total of 23,884 patients (n = 11,904 P2Y12i monotherapy, n = 11,980 standard DAPT) were included. Compared with standard DAPT, P2Y12i monotherapy after short DAPT was associated with similar odds of all-cause death (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.12, p = 0.26) and cardiovascular death (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.29, p = 0.29) at 1 year. Similarly, there were no significant differences in rates of myocardial infarction (OR 1.09, 0.83 to 1.43, p = 0.53), stent thrombosis (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.67, p = 0.70) and target-vessel revascularization (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01, p = 0.07) between the P2Y12i monotherapy and standard DAPT arms. The P2Y12i monotherapy group had significantly lower major bleeding (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.64, p < 0.001) when compared with standard DAPT. In conclusion, in patients with ACS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, P2Y12i monotherapy after short DAPT significantly reduces bleeding without increasing ischemic risk when compared with standard DAPT therapy.

Importance of Short-Term Neointimal Coverage of Drug-Eluting Stents in the Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is mandatory after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, but optimal DAPT duration remains a topic of intense discussion. The shorter regimen of DAPT might be especially beneficial for high-bleeding-risk (HBR) patients. Novel stent platforms have been designed with innovations that should facilitate vessel healing following stent implantation and enable short DAPT. This review aimed to summarize evidence of the neointimal coverage of short-term stents and their implications for DAPT duration. Results from histological and optical coherence tomography (OCT) studies confirm the significant role of uncovered struts after the implantation of a stent in patients presenting with late stent thrombosis. Several studies have shown favorable vessel healing at one month (with 83.2% of covered struts, on average) and three months following stent implantation (with 93.3% of covered struts, on average). Solely HBR patient trials have proven that one month of DAPT can be applicable and safe in this population. Three-month DAPT was tested in a more diverse population and remains effective and safe in comparison to a longer DAPT regimen. That evidence proves that short-term DAPT might be applicable, especially for HBR patients.

Predictors of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome and the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.

This study aims to estimate the risk factors of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to evaluate the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We enrolled 1266 patients with ACS in a telephone follow-up program to determine whether any of the patients were hospitalized for GI bleeding. We collected baseline data, laboratory tests, electrocardiograms, and echocardiography covering all ACS patients. Multivariable regression was performed to adjust for confounders and predictors of GI bleeding. At the same time, the optimal duration of DAPT for ACS patients was evaluated. A total of 1061 ACS patients were included in the study. After 13-68 months, 48 patients (4.5%) were hospitalized for GI bleeding. The risk of GI bleeding was significantly increased in patients treated with DAPT for more than 18 months (hazard ratio 12.792, 5.607-29.185, P < 0.01). Receiver Operating Characteristic curve showed that the duration of DAPT using a cutoff of 14.5 months resulted in a sensitivity of 66.7% and a specificity of 77%. In patients with ACS, DAPT time are the main risk factors of GI bleeding. The optimal duration of DAPT is 14.5 months.

Dynamic Prognosis Prediction for Patients on DAPT After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Model Development and Validation.

The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) in conjunction with recent updates in dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) management guidelines emphasizes the necessity for innovative models to predict ischemic or bleeding events after drug-eluting stent implantation. Leveraging AI for dynamic prediction has the potential to revolutionize risk stratification and provide personalized decision support for DAPT management. We developed and validated a new AI-based pipeline using retrospective data of drug-eluting stent-treated patients, sourced from the Cerner Health Facts data set (n=98 236) and Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (n=9978). The 36 months following drug-eluting stent implantation were designated as our primary forecasting interval, further segmented into 6 sequential prediction windows. We evaluated 5 distinct AI algorithms for their precision in predicting ischemic and bleeding risks. Model discriminative accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, among other metrics. The weighted light gradient boosting machine stood out as the preeminent model, thus earning its place as our AI-DAPT model. The AI-DAPT demonstrated peak accuracy in the 30 to 36 months window, charting an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 90% [95% CI, 88%-92%] for ischemia and 84% [95% CI, 82%-87%] for bleeding predictions. Our AI-DAPT excels in formulating iterative, refined dynamic predictions by assimilating ongoing updates from patients' clinical profiles, holding value as a novel smart clinical tool to facilitate optimal DAPT duration management with high accuracy and adaptability.

What is optimal dual anti-platelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention?

What is optimal dual anti-platelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention?

Duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after stent-assisted coil for unruptured intracranial aneurysm: A nationwide cohort study.

Stent-assisted coil (SAC) is increasingly used to treat unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA). However, the optimal duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after SAC insertion remains unknown. To assess the time-dependent effect of DAPT on the risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications after SAC. This is a retrospective cohort study among patients with UIA treated with SAC using the nationwide health claims database in South Korea between 2009 and 2020. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used, which included the use of DAPT as a time-dependent variable. The effect of DAPT was investigated for each period of "within 90 days," "91 to 180 days," "181 to 365 days," and "366 to 730 days" after SAC. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke and major bleeding in each period within two years after SAC. Of the 15,918 patients, mean age at SAC was 57.6 ± 10.8 years, and 3815 (24.0%) were men. The proportion of patients on DAPT was 79.4% at 90 days, 58.3% at 180 days, and 28.9% at 1 year after SAC. During the 2 years after SAC, the primary composite outcome occurred in 356 patients (2.2%). DAPT significantly reduced the primary composite outcome within 90 days after SAC (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.28-0.69; p < 0.001); however, this was not the case after 90 days (all p > 0.05). DAPT reduced ischemic stroke risk within 90 days (aHR, 0.31; 95% CI 0.18-0.54; p < 0.001), and 91 to 180 days after SAC (aHR 0.40; 95% CI 0.18-0.88; p = 0.022); however, after 180 days, DAPT was no longer beneficial. In patients with UIA treated with SAC, 3 months of DAPT was associated with a decreased risk of the composite of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications.

Short Versus Long Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation in Patients with Diabetes.

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains uncertain, with increasing data suggestive of acceptable short-term duration. Metabolically accelerated atherosclerosis associated with diabetes makes it essential to study short-term DAPT in this subgroup. With limited studies determining optimal DAPT strategies after second-generation stents in this subset, we aimed to establish the optimal duration of DAPT in the diabetic population using second-generation stents. To determine optimal DAPT duration in diabetic population undergoing PCI in 2nd generation stents. We conducted an electronic database search of randomized controlled trials from PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. A meta-analysis was conducted comparing outcomes of short-term (3-6 months) DAPT therapy versus long-term (12 months) DAPT therapy in the diabetic population undergoing PCI with second-generation stents. A total of 5 randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 3117 diabetic patients. Short-term DAPT did not show any statistical difference from long-term DAPT in achieving primary outcomes (relative ratio: 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-1.35, P = 0.84). Overall mortality (OR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.52-1.63, P = 0.98), myocardial infarction [odds ratio (OR)OR 1.02; 95% CI, 0.53-1.94, P = 0.85], stent thrombosis (OR 1.20; 95% CI, 0.55-2.60, P = 0.55), target vessel revascularization (OR 1.10; 95% CI, 0.45-2.73, P = 0.74), and stroke (OR 0.50; 95% CI, 0.082-2.43, P = 0.81) did not show any statistical difference between the 2 groups. Similarly, a subgroup analysis of study population comparing 6 versus 12 months of DAPT in diabetic population did not show any difference in net primary outcomes (relative ratio: 0.86, 95% CI 0.45-1.45, P = 0.60). There was no significant heterogeneity noted between the 2 groups. This meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of longer DAPT over shorter DAPT therapy in patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent in patients with diabetes.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Concise Review for Clinicians.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) combines two antiplatelet agents to decrease the risk of thrombotic complications associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Emerging data about the duration of DAPT is being published continuously. New approaches are trying to balance the time, benefits, and risks for patients taking DAPT for established cardiovascular diseases. Short-term dual DAPT of 3-6 months, or even 1 month in high-bleeding risk patients, is equivalent in terms of efficacy and effectiveness compared to long-term DAPT for patients who experienced percutaneous coronary intervention in an acute coronary syndrome setting. Prolonged DAPT beyond 12 months reduces stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and myocardial infarction rates but increases bleeding risk. Extended DAPT does not significantly benefit stable coronary artery disease patients in reducing stroke, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Ticagrelor and aspirin reduce cardiovascular events in stable coronary artery disease with diabetes but carry a higher bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy duration in atrial fibrillation patients after percutaneous coronary intervention depends on individual characteristics and bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy is crucial for post-coronary artery bypass graft and transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Aspirin (ASA) monotherapy is preferred. Antiplatelet therapy duration in peripheral artery disease depends on the scenario. Adding vorapaxar and cilostazol may benefit secondary prevention and claudication, respectively. Carotid artery disease patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke benefit from antiplatelet therapy and combining ASA and clopidogrel is more effective than ASA alone. The optimal duration of DAPT after carotid artery stenting is uncertain. Resistance to ASA and clopidogrel poses an incremental risk of deleterious cardiovascular events and stroke. The selection and duration of antiplatelet therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease requires careful consideration of both efficacy and safety outcomes. The use of combination therapies may provide added benefits but should be weighed against the risk of bleeding. Further research and clinical trials are needed to optimize antiplatelet treatment in different patient populations and clinical scenarios.

Contemporary Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Therapies for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Narrative Review of Current Literature and Guidelines.

Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. The annual incidence of new or recurrent stroke is approximately 795,000 cases per year in the United States, of which 87% are ischemic in nature. In addition to the management of modifiable high-risk factors to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke, antithrombotic agents (antiplatelets and anticoagulants) play an important role in secondary stroke prevention. This review will discuss the published literature on the use of antiplatelets and anticoagulants in secondary prevention of acute ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), including their pharmacology, efficacy, and adverse effects. We will also highlight the role of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in secondary stroke prevention, along with supporting literature. Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) with aspirin or clopidogrel reduces the risk of recurrent ischemic stroke in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA. However, as shown in recent trials, short-term DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 21-30days is more effective than SAPT in patients with minor acute non-cardioembolic stroke or high-risk TIA. Although short-term DAPT is highly effective in preventing recurrent stroke, a more prolonged course can increase bleeding risks without additional benefit. DAPT for 90days, followed by aspirin monotherapy for patients with large vessel intracranial atherosclerotic disease, is suitable for secondary stroke prevention. However, patients need to be monitored for both minor (e.g., bruising) and major (e.g., intracranial) bleeding complications. Conversely, oral warfarin and newer direct oral anticoagulant (DOACs) such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban are the agents of choice for secondary stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular cardioembolic strokes. DOACs may be preferred over warfarin due to decreased bleeding risks, including ICH, lack of need for international normalized ratio monitoring, no dietary restrictions, and limited drug-drug interactions. The choice between different antiplatelets and anticoagulants for prevention of ischemic stroke depends on the underlying stroke mechanism, cytochrome P450 2C19 polymorphisms, bleeding risk profile, compliance, drug tolerance, and drug resistance. Physicians must carefully weigh each patient's relative benefits and bleeding risks before initiating an antiplatelet/anticoagulant treatment regimen. Further studies are warranted to study the optimal duration of DAPT in symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis since the benefit is most pronounced in the short term while the bleeding risk remains high during the extended duration of therapy.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Cancer; Balancing between Ischemic and Bleeding Risk: A Narrative Review.

Cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with cancer can be caused by concomitant CV risk factors, cancer itself, and anticancer therapy. Since malignancy can dysregulate the hemostatic system, predisposing cancer patients to both thrombosis and hemorrhage, the administration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to patients with cancer who suffer from acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a clinical challenge to cardiologists. Apart from PCI and ACS, other structural interventions, such as TAVR, PFO-ASD closure, and LAA occlusion, and non-cardiac diseases, such as PAD and CVAs, may require DAPT. The aim of the present review is to review the current literature on the optimal antiplatelet therapy and duration of DAPT for oncologic patients, in order to reduce both the ischemic and bleeding risk in this high-risk population.

Thirty-Days versus Longer Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Treatment after Percutaneous Coronary Interventions with Newer Drug-Eluting Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abbreviation of the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (one or three months) has been recently proposed, especially for high bleeding risk patients, after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Three databases were screened for eligible randomized control trials. The primary endpoint was the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE). Secondary endpoints consisted of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent-thrombosis, repeat revascularization and major bleeding. We included four RCTs with a total of 26,576 patients; 13,282 patients were grouped in 30-days DAPT, while the remaining 13,294 were allocated in a longer period of DAPT. One month of DAPT did not significantly reduce NACE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.87, 95% confidence intervals [Cl]: 0.74-1.03); however, major bleedings were significantly reduced by 22% (OR: 0.78, 95% Cl: 0.65-0.94). Mortality or ischemic events (stroke, myocardial infarction, revascularization and stent thrombosis) were not affected. Thus, 30-days DAPT could be considered as safe and feasible after PCI with DES in selected patients, especially those with high bleeding risk. Forthcoming RCTs could shed light on the optimal duration of DAPT.

Thirty-days versus standard duration of dual antiplatelet treatment after percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background/Introduction Abbreviation of duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (one or three months) has been recently proposed, especially for high-bleeding risk patients, after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Purpose The purpose of the specific systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare 30-days versus longer duration (≥3 months) of DAPT in patients undergoing PCI with DES, focusing on ischemic and bleeding events. Methods Three databases were screened for eligible randomized-control trials. The primary endpoint was the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE), as they were defined in each trial. Secondary endpoints consisted of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infraction, stroke, stent-thrombosis, repeat revascularization and major bleeding. Results We included 4 RCTs with a total of 26,576 patients; 13,282 patients were grouped in 30-days DAPT, while the remaining 13,294 were allocated in longer period of DAPT. One-month of DAPT did not significantly reduce NACE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.87, 95% confidence intervals [Cl]: 0.74–1.03); however major bleedings were significantly reduced by 22% (OR: 0.78, 95% Cl: 0.65–0.94). Mortality or ischemic events (stroke, myocardial infraction, revascularization and stent thrombosis) were not affected. Conclusions Thirty-days DAPT did not significantly affect NACEs. However, odds of major bleedings were reduced significantly by 22%. Mortality and ischemic events did not differ between the two arms. Thus, 30-days DAPT could be considered as a safe and feasible after PCI with DES in selected patients, especially those in high-bleeding risk. Forthcoming RCTs could shed light on the optimal duration of DAPT. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Clopidogrel monotherapy following dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome post-drug-eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and direct/indirect treatment comparison

Abstract Background In patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) receiving a drug-eluting stent (DES), treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduces the risk of recurrent ischemic events. Optimal duration of DAPT depends on patient characteristics and switching to single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) is recommended after the course of DAPT. Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of switching to clopidogrel SAPT following DAPT in patients with ACS post DES-implantation. Methods A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted by searching MEDLINE®, Embase, and CENTRAL up to July 27, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated clopidogrel SAPT following DAPT in adults with ACS post-DES implantation were included. Heterogeneity of included studies was vetted in a feasibility assessment. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted using the metafor package for R. Direct comparisons were conducted for clopidogrel vs. aspirin and clopidogrel vs. DAPT. Using the Bucher method, aspirin vs. DAPT was indirectly compared by taking the difference between their respective pooled treatment effects vs. clopidogrel. A sensitivity analysis was conducted by including studies with a follow-up of 12 months. Results Of 5,349 records identified, seven unique studies (four RCTs and three observational studies) were eligible to be included in the SLR and quantitative treatment comparison. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was lower in patients who switched to clopidogrel SAPT after DAPT compared with those who switched to aspirin monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54, 0.98), and this difference was significant. No significant difference in risk of MACE was found between switching to clopidogrel SAPT after DAPT and continuation of DAPT (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.65, 1.25). This finding was consistent with the sensitivity analysis representing studies with follow-up of 12 months (HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.69, 1.31). Risk of bleeding was not analysed due to insufficient data across included studies for patients with ACS. However, within-study findings from one RCT of 4,136 patients demonstrated a significantly lower risk of bleeding, defined as thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (major and/or minor, for switching to clopidogrel SAPT following DAPT compared with continuation of DAPT (0.54% vs. 1.17% of patients had bleeding [HR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.94]). Conclusion Findings from this SLR suggest switching to clopidogrel SAPT after DAPT in ACS post-DES implantation has a lower risk of MACE compared with switching to aspirin monotherapy, and no difference in the risk of MACE compared with continuation of DAPT. There was insufficient data across the included studies to evaluate the bleeding risk, however, a single study indicated a lower bleeding risk with switching to clopidogrel SAPT. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

Techniques and Evidence for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: An Ongoing Journey

Techniques and Evidence for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: An Ongoing Journey

A-19 | Abbreviated Versus Prolonged Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) with Drug-Eluting Stents (DES): A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)

The optimal DAPT duration following PCI with DES placement in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients is not well established. This study aimed to compare the hazard ratio (HR) of cardiovascular (CV) mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, major bleeding (BARC 3-5) and their composite as MACE (major adverse cardiac events) between abbreviated (1 month) and prolonged (6-12 months) DAPT following DES placement.

760 Prevalence of eligibility criteria for prolonged dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with PEGASUS and COMPASS phenotypes: insights from the start-antiplatelet registry

Abstract Aims After 1 year of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), clinicians face the dilemma of choosing between prolonged DAPT with aspirin and ticagrelor 60 mg twice daily (PEGASUS strategy) or aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (COMPASS strategy). In recent years, there has been a widespread discussion about the optimal duration of DAPT and the best combination of drugs. To analyse the prevalence and clinical implications of the eligibility criteria for prolonged dual antithrombotic therapy with ticagrelor 60 mg twice daily and/or rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily in a contemporary real-world ACS registry. Methods and results Patients from the START-ANTIPLATELET registry (NCT02219984) were stratified according to the eligibility criteria of the PEGASUS and COMPASS studies to investigate the proportion of patients eligible for prolonged dual antithrombotic therapy at discharge and after 1-year of DAPT. Net adverse clinical events (NACE), defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major bleeding, at 1 year were also evaluated and compared among groups. 1844 were considered for the analysis at baseline. Out of 849 event-free patients continually receiving dual antiplatelet therapy for at least 1 year, 577 (68%) and 583 (68.7%) met at least one eligibility criterion for ticagrelor and rivaroxaban, respectively. In the PEGASUS-like patients, age was the most common criterion (71% of cases). The presence ≥2 cardiovascular risk factors was the most common eligibility criterion in the COMPASS-like patients (80.8%). At 1-year follow-up, 211 (11.4%) and 119 (6.5%) patients experienced NACE and MACE, respectively. The incidence of NACEs was higher in the PEGASUS-only group (15.4% vs. 8.4%; P = 0.008) and numerically higher in the COMPASS-only group (10.9% vs. 8.4%; P = 0.299). Conclusions In a contemporary real-world ACS cohort, approximately two-thirds of patients that complete 1-year DAPT met the eligibility criteria for ticagrelor 60 mg twice daily or rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily, showing a higher risk of NACEs.

Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Coated Balloon.

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device with theoretical advantages and promising results. Recent clinical observations have demonstrated that DCB tends to have both good efficacy and a good safety profile in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) for both bare-metal and drug-eluting stents (DES), de novo coronary artery disease (CAD), and other situation, such as high bleeding risk, chronic total occlusion, and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has become an essential medication in daily clinical practice, but the optimal duration of DAPT after the implantation of a DCB remains unknown. At the time of the first in vivo implantation of paclitaxel-DCB for the treatment of ISR in 2006, the protocol-defined DAPT duration was only 1 month. Subsequently, DAPT duration ranging from 1 to 12 months has been recommended by various trials. However, there have been no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the optimal duration of DAPT after DCB angioplasty. Current clinical guidelines normally recommend the duration of DAPT after DCB-only angioplasty based on data from RCTs on the optimal duration of DAPT after stenting. In this review, we summarized current clinical trials on DCB-only angioplasty for different types of CADs and their stipulated durations of DAPT, and compared their clinical results such as restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stent thrombosis event. We hope this review can assist clinicians in making reasonable decisions about the duration of DAPT after DCB implantation.