Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Coronary Artery Disease: a Review Article

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following an acute coronary syndrome or after placement of a coronary artery stent is superior to aspirin alone for prevention of atherothrombotic events but carries an increased bleeding risk. DAPT should be continued for at least 12 months based on current guidelines. Recent randomized trials demonstrate reduced ischemic events including myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and death with continued DAPT for up to 30 months or longer, particularly in the post-MI population. However, this clinical benefit is accompanied by an increased risk of bleeding. Additional trials show mixed safety and efficacy with duration of DAPT of less than 12 months. The current data emphasizes the need to individualize DAPT duration at the patient level to balance the clinical benefits of a reduced risk of cardiovascular ischemic events with the greater risk of clinically significant bleeding. Patients at an increased risk of ischemic events and a lower risk of bleeding should be strongly considered for prolonged DAPT beyond the 1 year currently recommended in the practice guidelines.     

急性冠状动脉综合征后双联抗血小板疗程的研究进展

急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)发生后,无论是否进行血运重建治疗,国内外指南均建议患者接受阿司匹林联合P2Y12抑制剂的双联抗血小板治疗策略(DAPT)至少12个月以降低复发性动脉粥样硬化血栓风险。然而,现有证据表明ACS患者的残余缺血风险将持续超过12个月,在合并高危出血风险等特殊类型的ACS患者中延长DAPT疗程的获益存在争论。通过回顾近年国内外指南及文献,文章旨在提出以ACS病理生理机制为导向,结合新型药物支架技术及危险分层体系评估DAPT的出血风险与抗缺血事件获益,最大化获益/风险比,最终给予患者个体化、精准化的治疗方案。     

Cost‐effectiveness analysis of 30‐month vs 12‐month dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin after drug‐eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Continuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 1 year reduces late stent thrombosis and ischemic events after drug‐eluting stents (DES) but increases risk of bleeding. We hypothesized that extending DAPT from 12 months to 30 months in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after DES is cost‐effective. A lifelong decision‐analytic model was designed to simulate 2 antiplatelet strategies in event‐free ACS patients who had completed 12‐month DAPT after DES: aspirin monotherapy (75–162 mg daily) and continuation of DAPT (clopidogrel 75 mg daily plus aspirin 75–162 mg daily) for 18 months. Clinical event rates, direct medical costs, and quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) gained were the primary outcomes from the US healthcare provider perspective. Base‐case results showed DAPT continuation gained higher QALYs (8.1769 vs 8.1582 QALYs) at lower cost (USD42 982 vs USD44 063). One‐way sensitivity analysis found that base‐case QALYs were sensitive to odds ratio (OR) of cardiovascular death with DAPT continuation and base‐case cost was sensitive to OR of nonfatal stroke with DAPT continuation. DAPT continuation remained cost‐effective when the ORs of nonfatal stroke and cardiovascular death were below 1.241 and 1.188, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, DAPT continuation was the preferred strategy in 74.75% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations at willingness‐to‐pay threshold of 50 000 USD/QALYs. Continuation of DAPT appears to be cost‐effective in ACS patients who were event‐free for 12‐month DAPT after DES. The cost‐effectiveness of DAPT for 30 months was highly subject to the OR of nonfatal stroke and OR of death with DAPT continuation.     

Shortened dual antiplatelet therapy in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention era

Percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting is followed by a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce stent thrombosis and avoid target lesion failure. The period of DAPT recommended in international guidelines following drug-eluting stent implantation is 12 mo for most patients with acute coronary syndrome, and 6 mo for patients with chronic coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. The new generation of drug-eluting stents have metallic platforms with thinner struts, associated with significantly less stent thrombosis. Shortened DAPT has been investigated with these stents, with evidence from randomised clinical trials for some individual stents showing non-inferior safety and efficacy outcomes. This has to be balanced by the effect of DAPT on secondary prevention of systemic cardiovascular disease especially in high-risk populations. This review will outline the current evidence for individual stents with regards to DAPT duration for both acute coronary syndrome and chronic coronary syndrome and discuss further directions for research and personalised medicine in this contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention era.     

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Prasugrel or Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel in Interventional Cardiology

For several years, clopidogrel plus aspirin has been the dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) of choice for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation. More recently, prasugrel and ticagrelor have demonstrated greater efficacy than clopidogrel. In TRITON-TIMI 38, the risk of TIMI major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery was similar for prasugrel and clopidogrel after excluding subgroups with increased bleeding risk (previous stroke or transient ischemic event; age ≥75 years; weight <60 kg). In the PLATO trial, rates of TIMI major bleeding were similar for ticagrelor and clopidogrel, but ticagrelor was associated with a significantly higher rate of non-CABG-related TIMI major bleeding. Current evidence suggests that prasugrel or ticagrelor plus aspirin should be the DAPT of choice in patients with ACS undergoing PCI unless they are at particularly high risk of bleeding. No studies have yet compared prasugrel and ticagrelor in ACS patients, however prasugrel and ticagrelor have different side effect profiles, and the choice of agent should be made either as a default choice and/or on an individual patient basis. Ongoing trials in ACS patients will increase the evidence base for new P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors and help to establish the most effective DAPT regimens.     

Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From a Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BackgroundWith newer generation drug eluting stents (DES), the minimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) recommended by guidelines has been reduced to 6 months in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Whether shorter duration of DAPT is safe in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains controversial. Our aim of this study was to investigate the optimal DAPT duration (≤3 months vs. 6 months vs. 12 months vs. >12 months) among patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsPUBMED and EMBASE were searched through January 2020 for randomized controlled trials of DAPT duration in patients with ACS. The ischemic outcomes were all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. The safety outcome was major and/or clinically relevant bleeding.ResultsOur search identified 14 eligible trials enrolling a total of 31,837 patients comparing different DAPT duration in patients with ACS. Short-term DAPT (≤3 months or 6 months) did not increase ischemic outcomes compared to long-term DAPT (12 months and >12 months). For bleeding outcomes, ≤3 months DAPT was associated with significant reduction in bleeding compared to 6 months, 12 months or >12 months DAPT (OR [95% CI]: 0.60 [0.37–0.98]; 0.68 [0.54–0.85] and 0.43 [0.34–0.54], respectively). These findings were similar when limited to 2nd generation DES.ConclusionsData from this meta-analysis of randomized trials support short-term (≤3 months and 6 months) DAPT in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Guidelines might need to consider short-term DAPT even in patients presenting with ACS, especially in this era of newer generation DES.     

Time Course of Death After Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for 1 Year

BackgroundExcess mortality remains the cornerstone concern despite dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after acute coronary syndrome. Some data suggest that shorter periods than 12 months of DAPT diminish bleeding risks yet still provide adequate vascular protection and improving survival. However, the precise timing of deaths after acute coronary syndrome has not been mapped in many studies. This knowledge may be critical for defining optimal treatment duration.MethodsAccess was gained to the data set for the Platelet Inhibition and Outcomes (PLATO) trial, which was issued by the Food and Drug Administration, in which post hoc analyses of timing of death events during DAPT (with either aspirin/ticagrelor or aspirin/clopidogrel) were performed. All-cause individual deaths were counted and plotted over time from day 1 to day 365 after the index event.ResultsAmong 18,624 enrollees, 938 total deaths were reported to the Food and Drug Administration in PLATO. After exclusion of deceased patients with missing dates, randomization errors, and deaths beyond 1 year of follow-up, 913 fatalities (509 after clopidogrel and 404 after ticagrelor) were analyzed. The PLATO records did not indicate where exactly deaths occurred making impossible to triage in the hospital versus outpatient fatalities. Most frequent deaths occurred within the Day 1 (n = 41); Day 2 (n = 48); and Day 3 (n = 33) and overall during the first week (n = 202; 22.1%) after the index acute coronary syndrome, with a gradual decline after Day 10 and Day 60, reaching background counts after Day 220.ConclusionFocusing on mortality reduction, this large data set may support a shorter than 12 months’ duration of DAPT.     

Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients with an Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background

The recent American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines on duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) recommend DAPT for 1 year in patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome, with a Class IIb recommendation for continuation. We aim to assess the evidence for these recommendations using a meta-analytic approach.

Intravenous Antiplatelet Therapy Bridging in Patients Undergoing Cardiac or Non-Cardiac Surgery Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundThe effect of perioperative bridging therapy on risks of ischemic cardiac events and major bleeding complications in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains undefined.MethodsWe report on 60 consecutive patients between 2010 and 2017 who required cardiac (CS; n = 15) or non-cardiac (NCS; n = 45) surgeries following PCI at our institution. Short-acting intravenous (IV) antiplatelet (APT) bridging with eptifibatide, tirofiban and cangrelor were instituted after DAPT interruption.ResultsAll patients were men with multiple atherosclerosis risk factors. An acute coronary syndrome indication (56.7%) was the most common PCI indication in the CS and NCS groups. Drug-eluting stents were used in 93.33% and 95.56% of the above groups, respectively. The median duration from PCI to CS and NCS were 11.17 and 18.25 months, respectively and 38.33% of all surgeries were performed within 6 months of the index PCI. Most patients were on background aspirin (83.33%) and clopidogrel (81.67%) and median duration of DAPT interruption was 7 days. Median duration of perioperative IV APT bridging was 3 days for CS and 5 days for NCS groups. In the CS group, two patients (13.33%) had non-fata myocardial infarction (MI), and four (26.67%) had clinically significant bleeding. No patients had perioperative stent thrombosis. In the NCS group, one patient (2.22%) had stent thrombosis; four (6.67%) had myocardial infarction, and five (11.11%) clinically significant bleeding.ConclusionsDespite using IV APT as bridging therapy during perioperative DAPT interruption in post-PCI patients, postoperative cardiac events and bleeding complications can still occur.     

Anithrombotische Therapie und Vorhofflimmern

Current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy preferably with prasugrel or ticagrelor for 12 months in patients after acute coronary syndrome with stent implantation. Problems occur in patients with a need for oral anticoagulation, such as patients with atrial fibrillation. In these patients a combination of oral anticoagulation and platelet inhibitors is necessary. Antithrombotic combination therapy is known to increase bleeding complications. In a small randomized trial the combination of a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and clopidogrel decreased bleeding compared to triple therapy with VKA, clopidogrel and aspirin. The new oral anticoagulants have consistently been shown to decrease bleeding complications compared to VKAs regardless of additional antiplatelet therapy. Because of the lack of randomized trials the individual decision about the intensity and duration of antithrombotic combination therapy should be based on the bleeding and ischemic risk in the individual patient. However, in most patients in addition to oral anticoagulation, antiplatelet monotherapy preferably with clopidogrel seems necessary only for 3–6 months.     

Meta-Analysis of Short vs. Prolonged Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation and Role of Continuation with either Aspirin or a P2Y12 Inhibitor Thereafter

Aim: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is an ongoing debate and novel data has emerged. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess outcomes of short vs. control DAPT duration. In addition, the role of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) after DAPT with either aspirin or P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy was analyzed. Methods: The authors searched MEDLINE and Cochrane databases and proceedings of international meetings for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing ≤ 3 months with ≥ 6 months DAPT after DES implantation. The primary and co-primary outcomes of interest were definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding. In addition, we performed an analysis on studies who continued with either aspirin or P2Y₁₂ monotherapy after DAPT. Results: 9 RCTs comprising 41,864 patients were included and we analyzed a short DAPT duration of median 1.5 months vs. 12.1 months in the control group. The risk for ST was similar with short vs. control DAPT duration (0.5 vs. 0.5%; hazard ratio 1.17[95% CI 0.89-1.54];p=0.26). Bleeding was significantly reduced with short vs. control DAPT duration (1.9 vs. 3.0%; 0.65[0.54-0.77];p＜0.0001). ST was not different between short vs. control DAPT duration in the analysis of the 4 RCTs who continued with aspirin after DAPT and the 5 P2Y₁₂ RCTs, respectively, and no heterogeneity was detected (p=0.861). Bleeding was also reduced with short vs. control DAPT in both the aspirin (1.2 vs. 1.7%; 0.71[0.51-0.99];p=0.04) and P2Y₁₂ inhibitor studies (2.1 vs. 3.4%; 0.62[0.47-0.80];p=0.0003) and no heterogeneity was detected (p=0.515). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis shows that short DAPT ≤ 3 months followed by SAPT reduces bleeding and is not associated with an increase in ST. The results were consistent within the aspirin and P2Y₁₂ SAPT studies.     

Which long-term antiplatelet regimen for patients with acute coronary syndromes?

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT ) is recommended up to 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndromes, but the risk of cardiovascular events in this group of subjects remains high, also in the long-term follow-up. The potential benefit of a prolonged period of DAPT has recently been assessed in three large-volume randomized clinical trials (PEGASUS, DAPT-MI, TRA2P-TIMI 50) but final results are quite difficult to interpret and clear indications for the clinical practice are so far lacking. A direct comparison of the three studies is challenging since relevant differences exist as to clinical features and risk profile of the study populations. Different anti-platelet drugs have been tested in addition to aspirin making it difficult to understand which antithrombotic regimen guarantees the best balance between thrombotic and haemorragic events. Finally, specific designs of these trials, evaluating complex composite end-points, may generate further difficulties in the interpretation of data. We believe that the use of total mortality rather than cardiovascular death as end-point, would better describe the long-term outcome incorporating the catastrophic consequences of bleeding. This review seeks to highlight strengths and weaknesses of these three large-volume trials and tries to establish whether or not prolonging DAPT beyond 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndromes is useful and which anti-thrombotic regimen would offer the best balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk.     

DAPT Score and the Impact of Ticagrelor Monotherapy During the Second Year After PCI

ObjectivesThis study assessed the ability of the dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score in stratifying ischemic and bleeding risk in a contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population.BackgroundThe DAPT score is recommended by guidelines as a tool to stratify ischemic and bleeding risk. Its utility in contemporary PCI is unknown.MethodsThe study studied patients in GLOBAL LEADERS (A Clinical Study Comparing Two Forms of Anti-platelet Therapy After Stent Implantation) who were free of major ischemic and bleeding events and adhered to antiplatelet strategy during the first year after PCI. The primary ischemic endpoint was the composite of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5. Outcomes from 12 to 24 months after PCI were compared according to the DAPT score.ResultsOf 11,289 patients that were event-free after the first year, 6,882 and 4,407 patients had low (<2) and high (≥2) DAPT scores, respectively. Compared with a low DAPT score, patients with a high DAPT score had a higher rate of the composites of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis (0.70% vs. 1.55%; p < 0.0001). The rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding was 0.54% and 0.30% in the low and high DAPT score groups, respectively (p = 0.058). The effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin monotherapy on primary ischemic and bleeding endpoints during the second year were no different among the 2 groups.ConclusionsThe DAPT score can stratify ischemic but not bleeding risk in a contemporary PCI population during the second year. The score did not provide additional value for selection of antiplatelet strategy beyond the first year.     

24- and 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting did not differ for clinical outcomes

QUESTION What is the relative efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) given for 24 months compared with 6 months after coronary stent implantation? METHODS DESIGN Randomized controlled trial (RCT) (Prolonging Dual Antiplatelet Treatment After Grading Stent-Induced Intimal Hyperplasia Study [PRODIGY]). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00611286. ALLOCATION Unclear allocation concealment.* BLINDING Blinded* (event adjudication committee). FOLLOW-UP PERIOD 2 years. SETTING 3 referral centers in Italy. PATIENTS 1970 patients ≥?18 years of age (mean age 68 y, 77% men) who had chronic, stable coronary artery disease or an acute coronary syndrome; ≥?1 lesion with ≥?50% diameter stenosis in a vessel ≥?2.25 mm in diameter that was suitable for coronary stent implantation; and elective, urgent, or emergent coronary angioplasty with 1 of 4 randomly assigned types of stent (bare metal or everolimus-, paclitaxel-, or zotarolimus-eluting) 30 days before DAPT randomization. Exclusion criteria included planned surgery within 24 months unless DAPT could be continued, major surgery within 15 days, history of bleeding diathesis, active bleeding or stroke in the past 6 months, expected need for oral anticoagulation therapy, pregnancy, or life expectancy <?24 months. INTERVENTION DAPT using oral clopidogrel, loading dose of 300 or 600 mg and then 75 mg/d, plus aspirin, loading dose of 160 to 325 mg orally or IV 500 mg and then 80 to 160 mg/d orally for 24 months (n =?987); or for 6 months followed by aspirin alone (n =?983). OUTCOMES Primary composite endpoint (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accident). Other outcomes included components of the composite endpoint, stent thrombosis, and bleeding. 1700 patients were needed to detect a 40% relative reduction in the primary endpoint at 2 years from 8% in the 6-month group (80% power, 2-sided α =?0.05). PATIENT FOLLOW-UP 99.6% (intention-to-treat analysis). MAIN RESULTS The main results are in the Table. CONCLUSION 24-month dual antiplatelet therapy after stent implantation increased bleeding and did not improve a composite of mortality, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accident more than 6-month therapy.24 mo vs 6 mo of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stent implantation?Outcomes24-mo treatment6-mo treatmentAt 2 yRRI (95% CI)NNH (CI)Primary composite?10.1%10.0%2% (-27 to 25)Not significantBleeding§7.4%3.5%53% (30 to 68)26 (20 to 45)RRR (CI)NNT (CI)Definite or probable stent thrombosis1.3%1.5%15% (-45 to 139)Not significant?Abbreviations defined in Glossary. RRI, RRR, NNH, and CI calculated from hazard ratios and event rates in article.?All-cause mortality (6.6% vs 6.6%, P =?0.98), myocardial infarction (4.0% vs 4.2%, P =?0.80), and cerebrovascular accident (2.1% vs 1.4%, P =?0.17).§Bleeding Academic Research Consortium classification type 5, 3, or 2.     

Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Umbrella Review

BackgroundThe optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting requires consideration of patient characteristics, and decision makers require a comprehensive overview of the evidence.MethodsWe performed an umbrella review of systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials of extended DAPT (> 12 months) compared with DAPT for 6 to 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. Outcomes of interest were death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, bleeding, and urgent revascularization. We aimed to assess the evidence of benefits and harms among clinically important subgroups (eg, elderly patients, those with diabetes, prior MI, acute coronary syndrome). We assessed the quality of the included reviews by use of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).ResultsSixteen SRs involving 8 randomized controlled trials were included. Most scored 7 or more points on the AMSTAR checklist. There was no significant difference in outcomes with extended DAPT compared with 6 months of DAPT in most SRs, with the exception of an increased risk of major bleeding. Compared with 12 months, extended DAPT may reduce the risk of MI and stent thrombosis; however, the findings were not consistent across all reviews. There have been conflicting reports of an increased risk of death with extended DAPT. Few SRs assessed outcomes among patient subgroups.ConclusionsExtended DAPT may reduce the risk of MI and stent thrombosis but increase the risk of major bleeding and death. Whether the effects of extended DAPT are consistent across patient subgroups is unclear, and future SRs should address this knowledge gap.     

Individualizing Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Duration Based on Bleeding Risk,Ischemic Risk,or Both: An Analysis From the DAPT Study

BackgroundGuidelines recommend individualization of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration. Whether to guide decisions based on bleeding risk, ischemic risk or a combination is not known.AimsTo compare a bleeding prediction model, an ischemic prediction model, and the DAPT score in guiding DAPT duration.Methods11,648 patients in the DAPT Study were categorized into higher and lower risk using a bleeding model, an ischemic model, and the DAPT score. Effect of 30 vs. 12 months of DAPT on bleeding events, ischemic events, and the combination (net-adverse clinical events [NACE]) was assessed.ResultsAmong patients stratified with the bleeding model, 30 vs. 12 months of DAPT resulted in similar ischemic and bleeding event rates. With the ischemic model, however, higher risk patients had a greater reduction in ischemic events with extended duration of DAPT (difference in risk differences [DRD]: −2.6%, 95% CI: −3.9 to −1.3%; p < 0.01), and a smaller increase in bleeding (DRD: −1.0%, 95% CI: −2.1–0.0%; p = 0.04). Similarly, high DAPT score patients had a greater reduction in ischemic events with extended DAPT duration (DRD: −2.4%, 95%: CI: −3.6 to −1.1%; p < 0.01) and a smaller increase in bleeding (DRD: −1.2%, 95%: CI: −2.2–0.0%; p = 0.02). Although NACE was similar for bleeding risk groups, NACE was significantly reduced with extended DAPT in the higher ischemic risk and high DAPT score groups.ConclusionsIn this low-bleeding risk population, stratifying patients based on predicted ischemic risk and the DAPT score best discerned benefit versus harm of extended DAPT duration on ischemic events, bleeding events, and NACE.Condensed abstractDuration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) should be guided by an individualized risk assessment. Bleeding risk tools have emerged to identify patients at high bleeding risk for whom truncated DAPT therapy may be safest. In a lower bleeding risk population, however, whether DAPT duration should be guided by bleeding risk, ischemic risk, or a combination is unknown.In this analysis, implementation of a score based on ischemic risk prediction and the DAPT score (a combination of ischemic and bleeding risk) best predicted ischemic events, bleeding events, and net-adverse clinical events (NACE).     

Updated Expert Consensus Statement on Platelet Function and Genetic Testing for Guiding P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitor Treatment in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor is the standard treatment for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The availability of different P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) with varying levels of potency has enabled physicians to contemplate individualized treatment regimens, which may include escalation or de-escalation of P2Y₁₂-inhibiting therapy. Indeed, individualized and alternative DAPT strategies may be chosen according to the clinical setting (stable coronary artery disease vs. acute coronary syndrome), the stage of the disease (early- vs. long-term treatment), and patient risk for ischemic and bleeding complications. A tailored DAPT approach may be potentially guided by platelet function testing (PFT) or genetic testing. Although the routine use of PFT or genetic testing in percutaneous coronary intervention–treated patients is not recommended, recent data have led to an update in guideline recommendations that allow considering selective use of PFT for DAPT de-escalation. However, guidelines do not expand on when to implement the selective use of such assays into decision making for personalized treatment approaches. Therefore, an international expert consensus group of key leaders from North America, Asia, and Europe with expertise in the field of antiplatelet treatment was convened. This document updates 2 prior consensus papers on this topic and summarizes the contemporary updated expert consensus recommendations for the selective use of PFT or genotyping in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Tratamiento antiagregante de muy corta duración tras la ICP y nuevos SLF: metanálisis de 5 estudios aleatorizados

Introduction and objectivesVery early (1-3 months) discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been recently proposed in percutaneous coronary interventions with modern drug-eluting stents (DES), with contrasting results. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the prognostic impact of very short DAPT regimens vs the standard 12-month regimen in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with new DES.MethodsLiterature and main scientific session abstracts were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT). The primary efficacy endpoint was mortality, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding events. A prespecified analysis was conducted according to the long-term antiplatelet agent.ResultsWe included 5 RCTs, with a total of 30 621 patients; 49.97% were randomized to very short (1-3 months) DAPT, followed by aspirin or P2Y₁₂I monotherapy. Shorter DAPT duration significantly reduced the rate of major bleeding (2% vs 3.1%, OR, 0.62; 95%CI, 0.46-0.84; P = .002; Phet = .02), but did not significantly condition overall mortality (1.3% vs 2%, OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.73-1.29; P = .84; Phet = .18). The reduction in bleeding events was even more significant in trials randomizing event-free patients at the time of DAPT discontinuation. The occurrence of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis was similar between shorter vs standard 12-month DAPT.ConclusionsBased on the current meta-analysis, a very short (1-3 months) period is associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding compared with the standard 12-month therapy, with no increase in major ischemic events and comparable survival.Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en