Sie können Operatoren mit Ihrer Suchanfrage kombinieren, um diese noch präziser einzugrenzen. Klicken Sie auf den Suchoperator, um eine Erklärung seiner Funktionsweise anzuzeigen.
Findet Dokumente, in denen beide Begriffe in beliebiger Reihenfolge innerhalb von maximal n Worten zueinander stehen. Empfehlung: Wählen Sie zwischen 15 und 30 als maximale Wortanzahl (z.B. NEAR(hybrid, antrieb, 20)).
Findet Dokumente, in denen der Begriff in Wortvarianten vorkommt, wobei diese VOR, HINTER oder VOR und HINTER dem Suchbegriff anschließen können (z.B., leichtbau*, *leichtbau, *leichtbau*).
Short Versus Long-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI in Contemporary Practice: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis
Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR patients) represent an important subset of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It remains unclear whether a shortened duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) confers benefits compared with prolonged duration of DAPT in this patient population. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare bleeding and ischemic outcomes among HBR patients receiving short- versus long-term DAPT after PCI.
Methods
A meta-analysis of studies comparing short-term (1–3 months) and long-term (6–12 months) DAPT after PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stents in HBR patients was performed.
Results
Six studies [1 randomized controlled trial (RCT), 2 RCT subanalyses, and 3 prospective propensity-matched studies] involving 15,908 patients were included in the meta-analysis. During a follow-up of 12 months, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduction in major bleeding events [odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.95; p = 0.03, I2 = 71] and comparable definite/probable stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke, compared with long-DAPT. Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) with aspirin was comparable to SAPT with P2Y12 inhibitor, with no treatment-by-subgroup interaction for major bleeding events (p-interaction = 0.27). In studies including patients presenting with MI, a trend of more frequent MI was noted in the short-DAPT arm (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.98–1.59; p = 0.07; I2 = 0). In a sensitivity analysis comparing 3- and 12-month DAPT, the 3-month DAPT strategy was associated with a higher risk of ischemic stroke (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.15–4.87; p = 0.02, I2 = 0%).
Conclusion
Short-term DAPT after PCI in HBR patients was associated a reduction in major bleeding events and similar ischemic outcomes. However, a higher risk of ischemic stroke and MI at 1 year of follow-up was seen in some subsets.
Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR patients) represent an important subset of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
In contemporty practice, it is unclear whether shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (1–3 months) confers safe ischemic outcomes and a reduction in bleeding events compared with prolonged DAPT (6–12 months).
What was learned from the study?
Among HBR patients after PCI, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduction in major bleeding events and similar ischemic outcomes compared to long-term DAPT. However, a higher risk of ischemic stroke and MI was seen in some subsets.
Future dedicated trials should investigate optimal strategies for patient-tailored DAPT in various clinical subgroups.
Introduction
Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR patients) represent an important patient subset in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice. Approximately 40% of patients undergoing PCI present with characteristics of HBR [1]. Drug-eluting stents (DES) have passed through considerable device iteration, consequently leading to modified designs with biodegradable or biocompatible polymers and thinner struts [2, 3]. These characteristics facilitate rapid endothelialization and enable a therapeutic strategy consisting of shorter durations of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). DAPT is generally indicated for 6–12 months after PCI [4], but some authors recently reported the safety of shorter durations of DAPT in HBR patients [5, 6].
Anzeige
However, it remains unclear whether short-term DAPT regimens after PCI with second-generation DES in HBR patients confer sufficient protection against ischemic events and enhance the benefits driven by the reduction in major bleeding events. This uncertainty arises from mixed results across studies with limited statistical power to detect low-frequency events, the discrepancy in studies regarding short- and long-term DAPT durations, and differences in the single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) used thereafter.
The primary objective of this study was to systematically review and synthesize available data from studies including 1–3 months of DAPT and compare these to studies including prolonged DAPT (6–12 months), in HBR patients who underwent PCI in contemporary practice.
Methods
Literature Search
This study was conducted according to the proposal for conducting and reporting Meta-analyses of Observational Studies (MOOSE) [7] and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PRISMA) [8]. A computerized search of the PubMed and Scopus databases was performed from January 2004 to December 2021 using the following search terms separately and in combination: “short DAPT,” “short dual antiplatelet therapy,” “percutaneous coronary intervention,” “PCI,” "HBR," and “high bleeding risk.” Bibliographies of the retrieved studies were screened for other relevant studies. The search was limited to articles published in the English language. The search strategy is shown in Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM) Table 1.
Study Selection
We performed a meta-analysis of studies that included patients fulfilling HBR criteria who underwent PCI with second-generation DES and compared different DAPT durations. The duration of therapy studied included short-term DAPT, defined as 1–3 months, and long-term DAPT duration, defined as 6–12 months. Studies addressing patients with a single HBR or those comparing short- versus long-term triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) with oral anticoagulation and DAPT after PCI were excluded.
Anzeige
Data Extraction and Quality Assessment
The data were extracted by two independent investigators (NM, RH) and confirmed by a third investigator (MM). Discrepancies were settled by consensus. The bias risk of the included studies was assessed using the New-Castle Ottawa Scale for cohort studies [9], and the revised Cochrane risk assessment tool for RCTs [10].
Study Outcomes
The primary outcome of the current study was the incidence of major bleeding events as defined according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classification [11]. Secondary outcomes included probable/definite stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke. Definitions of HBR criteria, inclusion and exclusion criteria, major bleeding, and DAPT duration are shown in ESM Table 2.
Data Synthesis and Statistical Analysis
Categorical variables were reported as counts and proportions, and continuous variables as means and standard deviation. Results were displayed using forest plots illustrating the relative contribution of the variable to the summary estimate of individual trials. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are presented as summary statistics. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic (I2), with I2 > 50% considered to indicate substantial heterogeneity and I2 > 75% to indicate considerable heterogeneity [12]. We used the Der-Simonian and Laird random-effects and random-effects generic inverse variance methods to calculate OR and MD, respectively, as we anticipated a high degree of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Tests were two-tailed, and a p value of ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. In the case of statistical significance, the OR was used to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) and the number needed to harm (NNH) [13].
Potential publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test by visual examination of the funnel plots [14]. A subgroup analysis for studies with aspirin as SAPT versus those with P2Y12 inhibitors as SAPT was performed regarding the primary outcome. The following sensitivity analyses were conducted: (1) including only studies that recruited patients presenting with MI, and (2) including only studies with a 3-month (short) DAPT duration. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager software version 5.4 (2020; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen).
Ethical approval was not required for this study as it is a study-level meta-analysis of published data. This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Results
The study selection process is shown in ESM Fig. 1. The search of the databases identified six studies as meeting the inclusion requirements: one RCT [15], two RCT subanalyses [16, 17], and three prospective propensity-matched studies [11, 18]. The study cohorts from the Xience 28 and Xience 90 studies [11] were reported in a single publication.
Characteristics of the included studies are shown in Table 1. Publication bias assessment is shown in ESM Fig. 2. Bias assessment as per Cochrane New-castle Ottawa scale and revised Cochrane risk assessment tool is shown in ESM Tables 3 and 4.
ASA Aspirin, BARC Bleeding Academic Research Consortium, CCS chronic coronary syndrome, DAPT dual antiplatlet therapy, MI myocardial infarction, NSTEMI non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, RCT randomized control trial, SAPT single aniplatelet therapy, ST stent thrombosis, STEMI ST elevation myocardial infarction, TIMI Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction, UA unstable angina,
In the studies included in this meta-analysis, 7725 patients received short-term DAPT and 7470 patients received long-term DAPT. Patient characteristics are shown in ESM Table 5.
Anzeige
Clinical Outcomes
During the 12 months of follow-up, the short-term DAPT strategy was associated with a reduction in major bleeding events compared with the long-term DAPT strategy (2.27% vs. 3.20%, respectively; OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42–0.95; p = 0.03, I2 = 71) (NNT = 86).
Both short- and long-term DAPT strategies were associated with a similar risk of definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.40% vs. 0.31%, respectively; OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.76–2.23; p = 0.34, I2 = 0%), all-cause mortality (3.1% vs. 2.9%, respectively; OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.87–1.27; p = 0.59, I2 = 0%), cardiovascular mortality (1.7% vs. 1.8%, respectively; OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.72–1.18; p = 0.53, I2 = 0%), MI (2.4% vs. 2.0%, respectively; OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.94–1.45; p = 0.16, I2 = 0%), and ischemic stroke (0.73% vs. 0.63%, respectively; OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.57–2.10; p = 0.78, I2 = 43%) (Figs. 1, 2).
Fig.1
Summary of the outcomes of short- versus long-term dual antiplatlet therapy (DAPT) in patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. a Major bleeding, b probable/definite stent thrombosis, c all-cause death, d cardiovascular death. CI Confidence interval
Summary of the outcomes of short- versus long-term DAPT in patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. a Myocardial infarction, b ischemic stroke
In a subgroup analysis, we compared trials employing SAPT with aspirin to trials employing SAPT with P2Y12 inhibitor; the results did not show any significant treatment-by-subgroup interaction regarding the primary outcome. Major bleeding events in studies employing SAPT with aspirin was 2.56% in the short-term DAPT arm versus 3.38% in the long-term DAPT arm (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49–1.21; p = 0.25, I2 = 66); in studies employing SAPT with P2Y12 inhibitor, the incidence of major bleeding events was 1.87% in the short-term DAPT arm versus 2.98% in the long-term DAPT arm (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15–1.14; p = 0.09, I2 = 81) (p-interaction = 0.27) (ESM Fig. 3).
A sensitivity analysis of studies that recruited patients primarily presenting with acute MI showed a trend towards higher re-infarction rates (2.55% vs. 2.03%; OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.98–1.59; p = 0.07, I2 = 0), with a significant reduction in major bleeding events (2.15% vs. 3.40%; OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36–0.84; p = 0.005, I2 = 64) (NNT 67) associated with the short-term DAPT strategy at the 1-year follow-up (ESM Fig. 4).
Anzeige
Furthermore, short- and long-term DAPT strategies had comparable outcomes when only studies comparing 3-month, short-term DAPT to 12-month, long-term DAPT duration were included, albeit with more ischemic stroke rates in the short-term DAPT arm (1.06% vs. 0.42%, respectively; OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.15–4.87; p = 0.02, I2 = 0%) (NNH 176) (ESM Fig. 5).
Discussion
In the meta-analysis reported here we compared the clinical outcomes of patients fulfilling HBR criteria who were treated with short- versus long-term DAPT after PCI. The major findings of our study include: (1) short duration of DAPT (1–3 months) was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding events (NNT = 86), with comparable cardiovascular ischemic events at 12 months; (2) major bleeding events were similar with either aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitors as SAPT; (3) there was an indication of more frequent recurrent MI in studies recruiting patients undergoing PCI after presenting with MI and treated with a short-term DAPT strategy; and (4) when limiting the analysis to 3 versus 12 months of DAPT after PCI, there was a high risk of ischemic stroke in the short-term DAPT arm (NNH = 176).
To the best of our knowledge, the current meta-analysis is the first to compare the outcomes of patients who received the short-term DAPT (1–3 months) accepted in contemporary clinical setting to outcomes in patients receiving long-term DAPT (6–12 months) after the use of contemporary second-generation drug-eluting stents. It should be noted that only studies that were primarily designed to investigate the HBR population receiving exclusively DAPT were included in the meta-analysis (studies including patients on triple anti-thrombotic therapy were excluded).
Unlike a previously published meta-analysis [19], we included only studies that were primarily designed for the HBR patient population with > 1 HBR criterion as the inclusion criterion. We believe that patients receiving TAT are a specific PCI population and that their number is decreasing over time. The routine use of TAT has been recently discouraged, and it is currently considered to be acceptable only in patients at high thrombotic risk and then only for the shortest possible period [20]. Studies comparing the durations of TAT after PCI were excluded from our meta-analysis to avoid heterogeneity.
Anzeige
Recently, less than or equal 3 months DAPT was equally effective with lower major bleeding events than 12 months DAPT after PCI in an all-comers population [21]. In the contrary to a previously reported meta-analysis [22], we included only studies comparing the contemporary accepted short-term DAPT duration (1–3 months) with DAPT of a prolonged duration (6–12 months).
It is plausible that the incidence of major bleeding would continue to rise with longer durations of DAPT. This meta-analysis showed that at the 1-year follow-up, the short-term DAPT strategy was associated with a 37% relative risk reduction (RRR) in major bleeding events compared with the prolonged DAPT strategy. The RRR even reached 45% among studies that included patients presenting with MI. Generally, major bleeding events result in higher mortality rates [23]. Nevertheless, in this analysis, the considerable reduction in major bleeding events did not lead to a significant reduction in mortality. One explanation for this result is a possible lack of statistical power to detect a concomitant significant reduction in death rates and the influence of competing risk due to ischemic events. Moreover, considerable heterogeneity was observed in terms of major bleeding events, possible due to differences in trial design and individual bleeding risk criteria. We find further dedicated randomized trials a necessity, with the aim to prove benefit of short-term DAPT in terms of decreased major bleeding events in HBR patients within different clinical subgroups.
Our sensitivity analysis revealed patients on aspirin as SAPT had comparable major bleeding rates as those on a P2Y12 inhibitor as SAPT, with no treatment-by-subgroup interaction [24].
DAPT in the PCI population reduces the risk of thrombotic occlusion of the stents until the vascular healing is completed; moreover, it protects the coronary vessel tree against the complications of atherosclerosis, thus reducing the incidence of thrombotic events in the non-treated coronary segments [25]. In our analysis, ischemic events were comparable between both groups at the 1-year follow-up. Our findings should be interpreted with caution as the study may have lacked the statistical power to identify a difference in ischemic events in high-risk subsets. The incidence of ischemic events might also be higher with prolonged follow-up, which we could not further analyze.
In our sensitivity analysis of studies that recruited patients presenting with MI, patients receiving short-term DAPT showed a trend toward higher MI rates at the 1-year follow-up. This finding has been previously described and is currently represented in the guidelines [26, 27]. Patients with MI represent a high thrombotic milieu with the potential of pan coronary artery inflammation and a significantly higher risk of subsequent MIs [28, 29]. Notably, most of the studies included in our analysis did not report data on the completeness of revascularization after the index PCI. Thus, the increased rates of subsequent MI might be related to critical or sub-critical lesions left behind rather than problems with the recently implanted stent.
The role of DAPT is well established in the primary and secondary prevention of cerebrovascular events [30]. Our analysis found a higher rate of ischemic strokes with a 3-month short-term DAPT regimen compared to a 12-month DAPT strategy. This finding illustrates that the need for prolonged antithrombotic therapy after PCI may be related to preventing non-stent-related events. Notably, this finding was not revealed in our main analysis, possible due to the presence of studies comparing 1- and 6-month DAPT in which relative small difference between the short- and long-term DAPT duration would not allow us to distinguish an obvious difference in ischemic outcomes.
Our data suggest that short-term DAPT generally carries a lower risk for major bleeding events after PCI, but that the optimal DAPT duration after DES placement should be tailored to individual patients, especially those presenting with acute coronary syndrome and those at risk of cerebrovascular adverse events, after carefully balancing the risks of ischemic versus bleeding events.
Limitations
Our study has a number of limitations. First, the included studies had a considerable degree of heterogeneity regarding the primary outcome. Studies primarily addressing TAT after PCI were excluded from this analysis, but some patients included in the MASTER-DAPT trial did receive TAT. Secondly, five observational studies were included, which introduces the risk of selection bias and confounding. Finally, some variance was introduced by clinical endpoint definitions, especially in bleeding event endpoints.
Conclusions
Short-term DAPT after PCI in HBR patients was generally associated with a reduction in major bleeding events and similar ischemic outcomes after PCI with second-generation DES. However, subgroups of interest with differential responses to DAPT emerged with higher ischemic stroke rates and a trend towards recurrent MI at 1 year of follow-up. Future dedicated trials should investigate the optimal strategies for patient-tailored DAPT in various clinical subgroups.
Acknowledgements
Funding
No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article.
Author Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Nader Mankerious, Michael Megaly, and Rayyan Hemetsberger. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Nader Mankerious and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Disclosures
Abdelhakim Allali is a proctor for Boston Scientific. Gert Richardt received an institutional research grant from Boston Scientific. Nader Mankerious, Michael Megaly, Rayyan Hemetsberger, Mohamed Samy, Ralph Toelg and Santiago Garcia have nothing to disclose.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Data Availability
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article/as supplementary information files. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager software version 5.4.The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen; 2020).
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Short Versus Long-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI in Contemporary Practice: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis
Verfasst von
Nader Mankerious
Michael Megaly
Rayyan Hemetsberger
Abdelhakim Allali
Mohamed Samy
Ralph Toelg
Santiago Garcia
Gert Richardt
Capodanno D, Morice MC, Angiolillo DJ, et al. Trial design principles for patients at high bleeding risk undergoing PCI: JACC scientific expert panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(12):1468–83.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Koppara T, Cheng Q, Yahagi K, et al. Thrombogenicity and early vascular healing response in metallic biodegradable polymer-based and fully bioabsorbable drug-eluting stents. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(6):e002427.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Mehran R, Cao D, Angiolillo DJ, et al. 3- or 1-month DAPT in patients at high bleeding risk undergoing everolimus-eluting stent implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14(17):1870–83.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur J Cardio-Thorac Surg. 2018;53(1):34–78.CrossRef
5.
Barbato E, Carrie D, Dardas P, et al. European expert consensus on rotational atherectomy. EuroIntervention. 2015;11(1):30–6.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Varenne O, Cook S, Sideris G, et al. Drug-eluting stents in elderly patients with coronary artery disease (SENIOR): a randomised single-blind trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10115):41–50.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the bleeding academic research consortium. Circulation. 2011;123(23):2736–47.CrossRefPubMed
Mendes D, Alves C, Batel-Marques F. Number needed to treat (NNT) in clinical literature: an appraisal. BMC Med. 2017;15(1):112.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Heg D, et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI in patients at high bleeding risk. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(18):1643–55.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Escaned J, Cao D, Baber U, et al. Ticagrelor monotherapy in patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: TWILIGHT-HBR. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(45):4624–34.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Watanabe H, Domei T, Morimoto T, et al. Details on the effect of very short dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with high bleeding risk: insight from the STOPDAPT-2 trial. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2021;36(1):91–103.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Kirtane AJ, Stoler R, Feldman R, et al. Primary results of the EVOLVE short DAPT study: evaluation of 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy in high bleeding risk patients treated with a bioabsorbable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14(3):e010144.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Garg A, Rout A, Farhan S, et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention using drug eluting stents in high bleeding risk patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2022;250:1–10.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Kumbhani DJ, Cannon CP, Beavers CJ, et al. 2020 ACC expert consensus decision pathway for anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention or with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology solution set oversight committee. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(5):629–58.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Benenati S, Galli M, De Marzo V, et al. Very short vs. long dual antiplatelet therapy after second generation drug-eluting stents in 35 785 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021;7(2):86–93.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zhang J, Chen Z, Li C, et al. Short dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Coron Artery Dis. 2022;33(7):580–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Valgimigli M, Costa F, Lokhnygina Y, et al. Trade-off of myocardial infarction vs bleeding types on mortality after acute coronary syndrome: lessons from the Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRACER) randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(11):804–10.PubMed
24.
Giacoppo D, Matsuda Y, Fovino LN, et al. Short dual antiplatelet therapy followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs. prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(4):308–19.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Pilgrim T, Windecker S. Antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. Heart. 2014;100(22):1750–6.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Palmerini T, Della Riva D, Benedetto U, et al. Three, six, or twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after DES implantation in patients with or without acute coronary syndromes: an individual patient data pairwise and network meta-analysis of six randomized trials and 11 473 patients. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(14):1034–43.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: the task force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2018;39(3):213–60.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Tousoulis D, Davies G, Stefanadis C, Toutouzas P, Ambrose JA. Inflammatory and thrombotic mechanisms in coronary atherosclerosis. Heart. 2003;89(9):993–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Song J, Murugiah K, Hu S, et al. Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of recurrent acute myocardial infarction in China. Heart. 2020;107(4):313–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Kleindorfer DO, Towfighi A, Chaturvedi S, et al. 2021 guideline for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2021;52(7):e364–467.CrossRefPubMed
Bei Notfallpatienten mit RAASi(Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosteron-Inhibitor)-bedingtem Angioödem sagten in einer retrospektiven Studie drei Faktoren einen schweren Verlauf vorher. Der wichtigste: ein Larynxödem.
Ob der Nachweis von positiven Schnitträndern nach radikaler Prostatektomie mittelfristig mit einem erhöhten Risiko für biochemische Rezidive und für Metastasen einhergeht, hängt auch von der Ausdehnung des Randbefalls ab.
Neue Studien haben 2025 praxisrelevante Informationen zur Behandlung von Patienten mit Vorhofflimmern geliefert, so etwa zur Antikoagulation bei gleichzeitiger Koronarerkrankung sowie zum möglichen Verzicht auf Antikoagulation nach Katheterablation.
Erhalten Menschen mit multiplem Myelom bereits nach dem ersten Versagen einer Lenalidomid-Behandlung eine CAR-T-Zell-Therapie gegen BCMA, wird die Sterberate im Vergleich zu einer Standardbehandlung um 45% reduziert. Das belegt ein Update einer Phase-3-Studie.
