The dawn of aspirin free strategy after short term dual antiplatelet for percutaneous coronary intervention: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Antithrombotic Treatment in Coronary Artery Disease

Coronary artery disease exhibits growing mortality and morbidity worldwide despite the advances in pharmacotherapy and coronary intervention. Coronary artery disease is classified in the acute coronary syndromes and chronic coronary syndromes according to the most recent guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. Antithrombotic treatment is the cornerstone of therapy in coronary artery disease due to the involvement of atherothrombosis in the pathophysiology of the disease. Administration of antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants and fibrinolytics reduce ischemic risk, which is amplified early post-acute coronary syndromes or post percutaneous coronary intervention; though, antithrombotic treatment increases the risk for bleeding. The balance between ischemic and bleeding risk is difficult to achieve and is affected by patient characteristics, procedural parameters, concomitant medications and pharmacologic characteristics of the antithrombotic agents. Several pharmacological strategies have been evaluated in patients with coronary artery disease, such as the effectiveness and safety of antithrombotic agents, optimal dual antiplatelet treatment schemes and duration, aspirin de-escalation strategies of dual antiplatelet regimens, dual inhibition pathway strategies as well as triple antithrombotic therapy. Future studies are needed in order to investigate the gaps in our knowledge, including special populations.

Association Between Platelet Reactivity and Long-Term Bleeding Complications After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to Diabetes Status

The relation between diabetes mellitus (DM) and bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is controversial. This study investigates the role of low platelet reactivity (LPR) in the bleeding risk stratification of patients who underwent PCI according to DM status. A total of 472 patients who underwent PCI on aspirin and clopidogrel were included retrospectively. Platelet reactivity was assessed using the VerifyNow P2Y(12) assay. LPR was defined as platelet reactivity unit ≤178. The primary end point was the occurrence of any bleeding at 5 years stratified by DM status and LPR. DM was present in 30.5% of patients. LPR was less frequent in patients with DM (p = 0.077). Overall, 11.9% of patients experienced a bleeding complication at 5 years. The incidence of bleeding did not differ in subjects with and without DM (p = 0.24). LPR had a similar value for stratifying the increased bleeding risk in patients with and without DM (interaction p between DM and LPR 0.69). A stepwise increase in the crude rates of bleeding complications was observed across patients with and without LPR and DM (log-rank p = 0.004), with those affected by both conditions having the highest crude incidence rate. In conclusion, on top of aspirin, approximately 1/3 of patients who underwent PCI on clopidogrel have LPR. Assessment of LPR provides a significant incremental value for predicting bleeding irrespective of DM status. Although the presence of DM per se does not increase the incidence of hemorrhagic complications, the coexistence of DM and LPR identifies the subgroup with the highest bleeding risk.

Index Admission and Thirty-Day Readmission Outcomes of Patients With Cancer Presenting With STEMI

BACKGROUND

National-level data of cancer patients' readmissions after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to compare the rates and causes of 30-day readmissions in patients with and without cancer.

METHODS

Among patients admitted with STEMI in the United States National Readmission Database (NRD) from October 2015-December 2017, we identified patients with the diagnosis of active breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer. The primary endpoint was the 30-day unplanned readmission rate. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital outcomes during the index admission and causes of readmissions. A propensity score model was used to compare the outcomes of patients with and without cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 385,522 patients were included in the analysis: 5956 with cancer and 379,566 without cancer. After propensity score matching, 23,880 patients were compared (Cancer = 5949, No Cancer = 17,931). Patients with cancer had higher 30-day readmission rates (19% vs. 14%, p < 0.01). The most common causes for readmission among patients with cancer were cardiac (31%), infectious (21%), oncologic (17%), respiratory (4%), stroke (4%), and renal (3%). During the first readmission, patients with cancer had higher adjusted rates of in-hospital mortality (15% vs. 7%; p < 0.01) and bleeding complications (31% vs. 21%; p < 0.01), compared to the non-cancer group. In addition, cancer (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.6, p < 0.01) was an independent predictor for 30-day readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

About one in five cancer patients presenting with STEMI will be readmitted within 30 days. Cardiac causes predominated the reason for 30-day readmissions in patients with cancer.

Reflections after TWILIGHT study: a new era in secondary prevention without aspirin?

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is mandatory in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), but carries an increased bleeding risk which must be weighed over the expected antithrombotic benefit. In recent years, DAPT optimization strategy has been enriched by the concept of early withdrawal of aspirin ('aspirin-free' strategy). This strategy is supported by the modern advancements in pharmacological and procedural fields (i.e. the availability of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors with a concomitant 'aspirin-like' effect), the advocated use of pharmacological non-antiplatelet secondary prevention strategies (i.e. angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, statins, beta-blockers), the use of modern stents and the increasingly widespread use of intra-coronary imaging techniques. In the last few years, five clinical trials (GLOBAL LEADERS, TWILIGHT, STOP-DAPT2, SMART CHOICE, TICO) and their own meta-analysis have been followed, aiming to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different 'aspirin-free' strategies. They showed that aspirin withdrawal (1-3 months after PCI), determines a consistent reduction of bleeding risk, without compromising efficacy endpoints. It resulted in a class IIa indication in the 2020 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation, which suggested the early withdrawal of aspirin in patients undergoing PCI and considered to be at low ischaemic and low bleeding risk, or at high bleeding risk.

Contemporary Clinical Use of Aspirin: Mechanisms of Action, Current Concepts, Unresolved Questions, and Future Perspectives

The ability of aspirin to inhibit platelet aggregation has positioned this agent within the most frequently used drugs worldwide. The aim of this article is to review the contemporary clinical use of aspirin and also to discuss unresolved issues not yet translated into clinical practice. Results from several clinical trials have led to strong guideline recommendations for aspirin use in the acute management and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. On the contrary, guidelines regarding aspirin use as primary prevention of cardiovascular disease are almost conservative, supported by recent trials reporting that the bleeding risk outweighs the potential benefits in most patients. In pregnancy, aspirin has proved efficient in preventing preeclampsia and small-for-gestational-age births in women at high risk, and is hence widely recommended in clinical guidelines. Despite the vast amount of clinical data on aspirin, several unresolved questions remain. Randomized trials have reported that aspirin reduces the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism, but the clinical relevance remains limited, because direct oral anticoagulants are more effective. Laboratory studies suggest that a twice-daily dosing regimen or evening intake may lead to more efficient platelet inhibition, and the potential clinical benefit of such strategies is currently being explored in ongoing clinical trials. Enteric-coated formulations of aspirin are frequently used, but it remains unclear if they are safer and as efficient as plain aspirin. In the future, aspirin use after percutaneous coronary interventions might not be mandatory in patients who also need anticoagulant therapy, as several trials support shorter aspirin duration strategies. On the other hand, new treatment indications for aspirin will likely arise, as there is growing evidence that aspirin may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and other types of cancer.