Journal of inflammation research · 2026
Comparative Evaluation of Prolonged Dual Antiplatelet Therapy versus Conventional Regimens on Prognosis in Patients with High Residual Inflammatory Risk: Results from a Prospective Observational Study.
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.
Wang Ziyi, Song Yanjun, Zheng Zhihao, Du Yuan, He Jining, Song Chenxi, Fu Rui, Dong Qiuting, Song Weihua, Yin Dong, Dou Kefei
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: High residual inflammatory risk (hs-CRP≥2mg/L) predicts worse prognosis and increased ischemic risk following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and its risk-benefit profile in post-PCI patients with high residual inflammatory risk remain unclear.
METHODS: Patients undergoing PCI with high residual inflammatory risk at Fuwai Hospital were consecutively enrolled. Patients were stratified into two groups based on DAPT duration: prolonged (>12 months) and conventional (≤12 months) groups. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, or stroke at 3 years. The key safety outcome was the 3-year rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding.
RESULTS: Among post-PCI patients with high residual inflammatory risk, 2440 individuals (69.5%) continued DAPT beyond 12 months. After three years of follow-up, prolonged DAPT was associated with a significantly lower risk of the primary outcome (1.5% vs. 4.2%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.347, 95% CI: 0.224-0.539). Similar benefits were observed for net adverse clinical events (1.4% vs. 4.1%; adjusted HR: 0.338, 95% CI: 0.216-0.53) and for the composite endpoint of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (0.6% vs. 3.1%; adjusted HR: 0.182, 95% CI: 0.097-0.341). Notably, the key safety endpoint did not differ significantly between the two DAPT durations during follow-up (1.0% vs. 1.2%; adjusted HR: 0.793, 95% CI: 0.401-1.57).
CONCLUSION: In patients who underwent PCI with high residual inflammatory risk, prolonged DAPT improved clinical outcomes by mitigating ischemic risk without increasing clinically significant bleeding.
METHODS: Patients undergoing PCI with high residual inflammatory risk at Fuwai Hospital were consecutively enrolled. Patients were stratified into two groups based on DAPT duration: prolonged (>12 months) and conventional (≤12 months) groups. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, or stroke at 3 years. The key safety outcome was the 3-year rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding.
RESULTS: Among post-PCI patients with high residual inflammatory risk, 2440 individuals (69.5%) continued DAPT beyond 12 months. After three years of follow-up, prolonged DAPT was associated with a significantly lower risk of the primary outcome (1.5% vs. 4.2%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.347, 95% CI: 0.224-0.539). Similar benefits were observed for net adverse clinical events (1.4% vs. 4.1%; adjusted HR: 0.338, 95% CI: 0.216-0.53) and for the composite endpoint of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (0.6% vs. 3.1%; adjusted HR: 0.182, 95% CI: 0.097-0.341). Notably, the key safety endpoint did not differ significantly between the two DAPT durations during follow-up (1.0% vs. 1.2%; adjusted HR: 0.793, 95% CI: 0.401-1.57).
CONCLUSION: In patients who underwent PCI with high residual inflammatory risk, prolonged DAPT improved clinical outcomes by mitigating ischemic risk without increasing clinically significant bleeding.