Journal of clinical medicine · 2020
No Differences in Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk among Clopidogrel-, Ticagrelor-, or Prasugrel-Based Dual Antiplatelet Therapy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Laredo Viviana, Revilla-Marti Pablo, Sostres Carlos, García Sandra, Carrera-Lasfuentes Patricia, Lanas Ángel
Аннотация
UNLABELLED: The risk for gastrointestinal bleeding from dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with new antiplatelets (prasugrel/ticagrelor) compared to clopidogrel is unclear.
AIM: To determine the risk and type of major (gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization) and minor (anemia and iron deficiency) gastrointestinal events with different types of DAPT.
METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study of patients who started DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention. Follow-up was censored after 12 months of DAPT, when a major gastrointestinal event occurred, or when DAPT was discontinued.
RESULTS: Among 1,327 patients (54.03% were treated with clopidogrel-based DAPT, 38.13% with ticagrelor-based DAPT, and 7.84% with prasugrel-based DAPT), 29.5% had at least one gastrointestinal event. Patients taking clopidogrel-DAPT were older, with more comorbidities, and higher gastrointestinal risk compared to those taking other DAPT regimens. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) showed no between-group differences in the risk for major (clopidogrel vs. new antiplatelets: HR 0.996; 95% confidence interval 0.497-1.996) and minor (HR 0.920; 0.712-1.189) gastrointestinal events. Most patients received proton pump inhibitors while on DAPT (93.3%) and after withdrawal (83.2%).
CONCLUSION: Prasugrel- or ticagrelor-based DAPT was not associated with increased gastrointestinal bleeding risk when compared to clopidogrel-DAPT. New antiplatelets do not necessarily need to be restricted to patients with low gastrointestinal risk.
AIM: To determine the risk and type of major (gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization) and minor (anemia and iron deficiency) gastrointestinal events with different types of DAPT.
METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study of patients who started DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention. Follow-up was censored after 12 months of DAPT, when a major gastrointestinal event occurred, or when DAPT was discontinued.
RESULTS: Among 1,327 patients (54.03% were treated with clopidogrel-based DAPT, 38.13% with ticagrelor-based DAPT, and 7.84% with prasugrel-based DAPT), 29.5% had at least one gastrointestinal event. Patients taking clopidogrel-DAPT were older, with more comorbidities, and higher gastrointestinal risk compared to those taking other DAPT regimens. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) showed no between-group differences in the risk for major (clopidogrel vs. new antiplatelets: HR 0.996; 95% confidence interval 0.497-1.996) and minor (HR 0.920; 0.712-1.189) gastrointestinal events. Most patients received proton pump inhibitors while on DAPT (93.3%) and after withdrawal (83.2%).
CONCLUSION: Prasugrel- or ticagrelor-based DAPT was not associated with increased gastrointestinal bleeding risk when compared to clopidogrel-DAPT. New antiplatelets do not necessarily need to be restricted to patients with low gastrointestinal risk.