BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, major society guidelines have recommended the use of newer P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel for those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome. It is unclear what impact these recommendations had on clinical practice.
RESULTS: All percutaneous coronary intervention procedures (n=534 210) for acute coronary syndrome in England and Wales (April 1, 2010, to March 31, 2022) were retrospectively analyzed, stratified by choice of preprocedural P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel, ticagrelor, and prasugrel). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine odds ratios of receipt of ticagrelor and prasugrel (versus clopidogrel) over time, and predictors of their receipt. Overall, there was a significant increase in receipt of newer P2Y12 inhibitors from 2010 to 2020 (2022 versus 2010: ticagrelor odds ratio, 8.12 [95% CI, 7.67-8.60]; prasugrel odds ratio, 6.14 [95% CI, 5.53-6.81]), more so in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction than non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome indication. The most significant increase in odds of receipt of prasugrel was observed between 2020 and 2022 (P<0.001), following a decline/plateau in its use in earlier years (2011-2019). In contrast, the odds of receipt of ticagrelor significantly increased in earlier years (2012-2017, Ptrend<0.001), after which the trend was stable (Ptrend=0.093).
CONCLUSIONS: Over a 13-year-period, there has been a significant increase in use of newer P2Y12 inhibitors, although uptake of prasugrel use remained significantly lower than ticagrelor. Earlier society guidelines (pre-2017) were associated with the highest rates of ticagrelor use for non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction cases while the ISAR-REACT 5 (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial and later society guidelines were associated with higher prasugrel use, mainly for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction indication.

The aim of the study was to assess whether current guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in daily clinical practice are adequately applied in the Belgrade Emergency Medical Service (EMS). A retrospective research included 2,982 STEMI patients who were cared for by EMS teams. Therapy consisting of morphine, oxygen, nitroglycerin and aspirin (MONA) was applied. Dual antiaggregation therapy (aspirin 325 mg + ticagrelor 180 mg or clopidogrel 600 mg) was administered to patients with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) indicated. With electrocardiographic monitoring included, the patients were transported directly to PCI unit with announcement of the arrival. Response times I-V were measured. There was an increasing trend in the number of STEMI patients. A rapid increase in the use of dual antiaggregation therapy (MONA and clopidogrel or MONA and ticagrelor) was reported from year to year, as well as a dramatic increase in the use of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel. The time from receiving the call to the arrival on the scene was 13.72 minutes, and the time from receiving the call to hospital arrival was 52.83 minutes. Our physicians care for STEMI patients in accordance with the current international and local recommendations.

To appraise all available antithrombotic treatments within or after 12 months following coronary revascularization and/or acute coronary syndrome in two network meta-analyses.
Forty-three (N = 189 261 patients) trials within 12 months and 19 (N = 139 086 patients) trials beyond 12 months were included for efficacy/safety endpoints appraisal. Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg bis in die (b.i.d.) [hazard ratio (HR), 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-0.88], aspirin and ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95), or aspirin, clopidogrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86) were the only treatments associated with lower cardiovascular mortality, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel, without or with greater bleeding risk for the first and the other treatment options, respectively. Beyond 12 months, no strategy lowered mortality; compared with aspirin; the greatest reductions of myocardial infarction (MI) were found with aspirin and clopidogrel (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85) or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (HR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.61-0.95), especially ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.92), and of stroke with VKA (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76) or aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76). All treatments increased bleeding except P2Y12 monotherapy, compared with aspirin.
Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg monotherapy was the only treatment associated with lower mortality, without bleeding risk trade-off compared with aspirin and clopidogrel. Beyond 12 months, P2Y12 monotherapy, especially ticagrelor 90 mg, was associated with lower MI without bleeding trade-off; aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg most effectively reduced stroke, with a more acceptable bleeding risk than VKA, compared with aspirin.Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifiers: CRD42021243985 and CRD42021252398.

This review is a summary of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines focused on dual antiplatelet therapy in patients after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Given a large number of recommendations concerning antiplatelet therapy published in various ESC guidelines, the main goal of this paper was to compile these separate recommendations into one document. In addition, we set out to present the current state of knowledge and create an algorithm that would be based on all of these guidelines in hope that it would allow quick navigation when selecting the type and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) depending on the clinical scenario with a special emphasis on evaluating both ischemic and bleeding risks. The review is based on the ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes (2019), revascularization (2018), acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (2017), DAPT (2017), and acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) (2020). The review also provides brief information on the most important studies and meta-analyses in this area, as well as practical pointers for management in the case of bleeding complications and before urgent surgery in patients on DAPT.

Antiplatelet therapy, mainly consisting of aspirin and P2Y12 receptor antagonists, is the cornerstone of the pharmacological treatment and prevention of atherothrombotic diseases. Its use, especially in secondary cardiovascular prevention, has significantly improved patient clinical outcomes in the last decades. Primary safety endpoint (i.e., bleeding complications) remain a major drawback of antiplatelet drugs. National and international societies have published and regularly updated guidelines for antiplatelet therapy aiming to provide clinicians with practical recommendations for a better handling of these drugs in various clinical settings. Many recommendations find common ground between international guidelines, but certain strategies vary across the countries, particularly with regard to the choice of molecules, dosage, and treatment duration. In this review, we detail and discuss the main antiplatelet therapy indications in the light of the different published guidelines and the significant number of recently published clinical trials and meta-analyses and highlight the areas that deserve further investigation in order to improve antiplatelet therapy in patients with atherothrombotic diseases.

The aim of the present European Stroke Organisation Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) management guideline document is to provide clinically useful evidence-based recommendations on approaches to triage, investigation and secondary prevention, particularly in the acute phase following TIA. The guidelines were prepared following the Standard Operational Procedure for a European Stroke Organisation guideline document and according to GRADE methodology. As a basic principle, we defined TIA clinically and pragmatically for generalisability as transient neurological symptoms, likely to be due to focal cerebral or ocular ischaemia, which last less than 24 hours. High risk TIA was defined based on clinical features in patients seen early after their event or having other features suggesting a high early risk of stroke (e.g. ABCD2 score of 4 or greater, or weakness or speech disturbance for greater than five minutes, or recurrent events, or significant ipsilateral large artery disease e.g. carotid stenosis, intracranial stenosis). Overall, we strongly recommend using dual antiplatelet treatment with clopidogrel and aspirin short term, in high-risk non-cardioembolic TIA patients, with an ABCD2 score of 4 or greater, as defined in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We further recommend specialist review within 24 hours after the onset of TIA symptoms. We suggest review in a specialist TIA clinic rather than conventional outpatients, if managed in an outpatient setting. We make a recommendation to use either MRA or CTA in TIA patients for additional confirmation of large artery stenosis of 50% or greater, in order to guide further management, such as clarifying degree of carotid stenosis detected with carotid duplex ultrasound. We make a recommendation against using prediction tools (eg ABCD2 score) alone to identify high risk patients or to make triage and treatment decisions in suspected TIA patients as due to limited sensitivity of the scores, those with score value of 3 or less may include significant numbers of individual patients at risk of recurrent stroke, who require early assessment and treatment. These recommendations aim to emphasise the importance of prompt acute assessment and relevant secondary prevention. There are no data from randomised controlled trials on prediction tool use and optimal imaging strategies in suspected TIA.

The aim of the present European Stroke Organisation Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) management guideline document is to provide clinically useful evidence-based recommendations on approaches to triage, investigation and secondary prevention, particularly in the acute phase following TIA. The guidelines were prepared following the Standard Operational Procedure for a European Stroke Organisation guideline document and according to GRADE methodology. As a basic principle, we defined TIA clinically and pragmatically for generalisability as transient neurological symptoms, likely to be due to focal cerebral or ocular ischaemia, which last less than 24 hours. High risk TIA was defined based on clinical features in patients seen early after their event or having other features suggesting a high early risk of stroke (e.g. ABCD2 score of 4 or greater, or weakness or speech disturbance for greater than five minutes, or recurrent events, or significant ipsilateral large artery disease e.g. carotid stenosis, intracranial stenosis). Overall, we strongly recommend using dual antiplatelet treatment with clopidogrel and aspirin short term, in high-risk non-cardioembolic TIA patients, with an ABCD2 score of 4 or greater, as defined in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We further recommend specialist review within 24 hours after the onset of TIA symptoms. We suggest review in a specialist TIA clinic rather than conventional outpatients, if managed in an outpatient setting. We make a recommendation to use either MRA or CTA in TIA patients for additional confirmation of large artery stenosis of 50% or greater, in order to guide further management, such as clarifying degree of carotid stenosis detected with carotid duplex ultrasound. We make a recommendation against using prediction tools (eg ABCD2 score) alone to identify high risk patients or to make triage and treatment decisions in suspected TIA patients as due to limited sensitivity of the scores, those with score value of 3 or less may include significant numbers of individual patients at risk of recurrent stroke, who require early assessment and treatment. These recommendations aim to emphasise the importance of prompt acute assessment and relevant secondary prevention. There are no data from randomised controlled trials on prediction tool use and optimal imaging strategies in suspected TIA.

In the 2020 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), the experts proposed to put an end to the equipoise of ticagrelor and prasugrel in addition to aspirin in patients with NSTE-ACS who proceed to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). They gave a strong level of recommendation (IIa) in favor of prasugrel over ticagrelor in these patients. We challenge this proposition, which was mainly driven by the results of ISAR-REACT 5, an open-label prospective head-to-head study of a prasugrel-based strategy compared with a ticagrelor-based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. In addition to the methodological concerns regarding the ISAR-REACT 5 study, we also question this decision in light of the ISAR-REACT 5 diabetes mellitus subgroup analysis and previous studies and meta-analysis that showed no difference between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS. Although we agree with the \"one size does not fit all\" concept for antiplatelet regimens in patients with ACS who proceed to PCI, we believe that the decision to strongly favor prasugrel was premature and not supported enough by the ISAR-REACT 5 results. In our opinion, equipoise remains between the ticagrelor- and prasugrel-based strategies and more data are needed to settle the debate.

The increased risk of non-cardiovascular death in patients receiving clopidogrel or prasugrel in comparison with the placebo group in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) trial in contrast to the decreased risk of cardiovascular death and all-cause death seen in patients treated with low-dose ticagrelor in the EU label population of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial, resulted in inclusion in the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines the recommendation for use of clopidogrel or prasugrel only if the patient is not eligible for treatment with ticagrelor. The prevalence of the primary outcome composed of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction was lower in the low-dose rivaroxaban and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) group than in the ASA-alone group in the COMPASS trial. Moreover, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality rates were lower in the rivaroxaban-plus-ASA group. Comparison of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 and COMPASS trial patient characteristics clearly shows that each of these treatment strategies should be addressed at different groups of patients. A greater benefit in post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with a high risk of ischemic events and without high bleeding risk may be expected with ASA and ticagrelor 60 mg b.i.d. when the therapy is continued without interruption or with short interruption only after ACS. On the other hand, ASA and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. seems to be a better option when indications for dual antithrombotic therapy (DATT) appear after a longer time from ACS (more than 2 years) and/or from cessation of DAPT (more than 1 year) and in patients with multiple vascular bed atherosclerosis. Thus, both options of DATTs complement each other rather than compete, as can be presumed from the recommendations. However, a direct comparison between these strategies should be tested in future clinical trials.

暂无摘要。