Multicenter Randomized Trial Evaluating the Efficacy of Cilostazol on Ischemic Vascular Complications After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Coronary Heart Disease

The effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular treatment for occlusive femoropopliteal disease

OBJECTIVE

Restenosis and late occlusion remain a significant problem for endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effect of cilostazol on late outcomes after endovascular repair of occlusive femoropopliteal disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted conforming to established criteria to identify articles published up to September 2023 evaluating late outcomes after endovascular treatment for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. Eligible studies should compare outcomes between patients treated with cilostazol and patients not treated with cilostazol. Both prospective and retrospective studies were eligible. Late outcomes included primary patency (PP), restenosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation during follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 clinical studies were identified for analysis including 4721 patients (1831 with cilostazol vs 2890 without cilostazol) that were treated for 5703 lesions (2235 with cilostazol vs 3468 without cilostazol). All studies were performed in Japan. Mean follow-up was 24.1 ± 12.5 months. Cilostazol was associated with a lower risk for restenosis (pooled odds ratio [OR], 0.503; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.383-0.660; P < .0001). However, no association was found between cilostazol and TLR (pooled OR, 0.918; 95% CI, 0.300-2.812; P = .881) as well as major amputation (pooled OR, 1.512; 95% CI, 0.734-3.116; P = .263). Regarding primary patency, cilostazol was associated with a higher 12-month PP (OR, 3.047; 95% CI, 1.168-7.946; P = .023), and a higher 36-month PP (OR, 1.616; 95% CI, 1.412-1.850; P < .0001). No association was found between cilostazol and mortality during follow-up (pooled OR, .755; 95% CI, 0.293-1.946; P = .561).

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol seems to have a positive effect on 1- to 3-year PP and restenosis rates among patients treated endovascularly for atherosclerotic femoropopliteal disease. A positive effect on TLR and amputation risk was not verified in this review.

Different association of atherogenic index of plasma with the risk of high platelet reactivity according to the presentation of acute myocardial infarction

This study evaluated the association of atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) with platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes according to acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The composite of 3-year adverse outcomes of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accident was evaluated in 10,735 patients after successful percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. AIP was defined as the base 10 logarithm of the ratio of triglyceride to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration. High platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as ≥ 252 P2Y12 reactivity unit. An increase of AIP (per-0.1 unit) was related to the decreased risk of HPR [odds ratio (OR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-0.99; P = 0.001] in non-AMI patients, not in AMI patients (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.01; P = 0.138). The HPR was associated with the increased risk of composite outcomes in both non-AMI and AMI patients (all-P < 0.05). AIP levels were not independently associated with the risk of composite outcomes in both patients with non-AMI and AMI. In conclusion, an inverse association between AIP and the risk of HPR was observed in patients with non-AMI. This suggests that the association between plasma atherogenicity and platelet reactivity may play a substantial role in the development of AMI.Trial registration: NCT04734028.

Adjunctive Cilostazol in Patients With High Residual Platelet Reactivity After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized, Open-Label, Single-Center, Prospective Study (ADJUST-HPR)

BACKGROUND

Cilostazol as an adjunct to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) postcoronary stenting may further reduce vascular occlusion risks. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of cilostazol on high residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) in patients undergoing drug-eluting coronary stent implantation.

METHODS

In a randomized, open-label, single-center, prospective study, the degree of platelet inhibition by cilostazol 100 mg twice daily was assessed on top of conventional DAPT compared with standard clopidogrel and low-dose aspirin combination in poststent patients with HRPR. HRPR was defined as P2Y12 units (PRU) > 240 as measured by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. In addition, the platelet activity was assessed by light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) and Multiplate electrode analyzer (MEA).

RESULTS

The total of 148 patients were screened, and HRPR was observed in 64 (43.2%). Those were randomized for DAPT versus triple therapy (TAPT). After 30 days, TAPT group exhibited significantly lower rate of HRPR when assessed by all 3 devices (VerifyNow: 40.0 vs. 66.7% P = 0.04, LTA: 6.7 vs. 30.0% P = 0.02, MEA: 10.0 vs. 30.0% P = 0.05 L all vs. DAPT). Also, higher absolute mean difference in TAPT versus DAPT group after 30 days (VerifyNow: 71.3 ± 38.2 vs. 24.6 ± 40.2 P < 0.001, LTA: 23.9 ± 15.1 vs. 9.4 ± 11.8 P < 0.001, MEA: 9.3 ± 12.9 vs. 2.4 ± 17.3 P = 0.08) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Cilostazol in addition to standard DAPT reduces the incidence of HRPR and diminishes further platelet activity in poststent patients. Whether this favorable laboratory finding will affect clinical outcomes requires an adequately powered randomized trial.

The Role of Cilostazol, a Phosphodiesterase-3 Inhibitor, in the Development of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Biology: A Review with Meta-Analysis

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) stands as the leading global cause of mortality. Addressing this vital and pervasive condition requires a multifaceted approach, in which antiplatelet intervention plays a pivotal role, together with antihypertensive, antidiabetic, and lipid-lowering therapies. Among the antiplatelet agents available currently, cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase-3 inhibitor, offers a spectrum of pharmacological effects. These encompass vasodilation, the impediment of platelet activation and aggregation, thrombosis inhibition, limb blood flow augmentation, lipid profile enhancement through triglyceride reduction and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol elevation, and the suppression of vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation. However, the role of cilostazol has not been clearly documented in many guidelines for ASCVD. We comprehensively reviewed the cardiovascular effects of cilostazol within randomized clinical trials that compared it to control or active agents and involved individuals with previous coronary artery disease or stroke, as well as those with no previous history of such conditions. Our approach demonstrated that the administration of cilostazol effectively reduced adverse cardiovascular events, although there was less evidence regarding its impact on myocardial infarction. Most studies have consistently reported its favorable effects in reducing intermittent claudication and enhancing ambulatory capacity in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Furthermore, cilostazol has shown promise in mitigating restenosis following coronary stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome. While research from more diverse regions is still needed, our findings shed light on the broader implications of cilostazol in the context of atherosclerosis and vascular biology, particularly for individuals at high risk of ASCVD.

High platelet reactivity strongly predicts early stent thrombosis in patients with drug-eluting stent implantation

Stent thrombosis (ST) is a fatal complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The association between P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) level and stent thrombosis occurrence remains unclear. Based on the multicenter, observational PTRG-DES (Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term proGnosis in DES-treated patients) registry of patients with drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation, a total of 11,714 patients with PRU values were analyzed. We sought to identify the predictors of early stent thrombosis (EST) and compared the primary outcome, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization, between EST and non-EST groups. EST, defined as definite ST within 1 month after index PCI, occurred in 51 patients. PRU values were significantly higher in the EST group (263.5 ± 70.8 vs. 217.5 ± 78.7, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, PRU ≥ 252 (OR, 5.10; 95% CI 1.58-16.46; p = 0.006) and aspirin reaction unit ≥ 414 (OR 4.85; 95% CI 1.07-21.97; p = 0.040) were independent predictors of EST. The cumulative incidence of primary composite outcome at one year was significantly higher in the EST group (38.2% vs. 3.9%, Log-rank p < 0.001). In patients treated with clopidogrel after successful DES implantation, EST was associated with higher platelet reactivities, and a greater risk of cardiovascular events.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04734028.

Effect of Calcium Channel Blockers on Antiplatelet Activity of Clopidogrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from the PTRG-DES Consortium

Aims: Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are frequently co-administered with clopidogrel in cardiovascular disease. Although an inhibitory drug interaction exists between them, comprehensive large-scale studies for its validation are lacking. We investigated interactions between CCBs and clopidogrel using a large-scale national registry of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and Results: The Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term Prognosis-Platelet Function Test consortium investigates the association between platelet function test and long-term prognosis during dual antiplatelet therapy including clopidogrel in patients using drug-eluting stents. We compared the ex vivo platelet reactivity using the VerifyNow P2Y12 test and clinical outcomes between CCB users and non-users. Between 2003 and 2018, 11 714 patients were enrolled and categorized into two groups according to CCB usage. A composite endpoint encompassing all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke was defined as a major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE). During the 5-year follow-up period, no significant differences were observed in P2Y12 reaction units (215.8 ± 84.7 vs 218.4 ± 76.7, P = .156), MACCEs, major bleeding, or high platelet reactivity rates, even after adjusting for propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). When limited to the high platelet reactivity cohort (≥252 PRU), the results remained consistent for MACCE [PSM-adjusted, HR: 0.923 (0.644-1.323), P-value .663; IPTW-adjusted, HR: 1.300 (0.822-2.056), P-value .262]. Conclusions: CCB and clopidogrel co-administration does not appear to significantly impact clopidogrel responsiveness or clinical outcomes. Despite these promising results, further investigation may be warranted. Clinical trial registration: Platelet Function and genoType-Related Long-term progGosis in DES-treated Patients: A Consortium From Multi-centered Registries [PTRG-DES]; NCT04734028.

Efficacy and safety of cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy compared with clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 4 trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies reported that compared to conventional dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT; aspirin + clopidogrel), triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT), involving the addition of cilostazol to DAT, had better clinical outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the optimal duration of TAT is yet to be determined.

METHODS

In total, 985 patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs) were prospectively enrolled in 15 PCI centers in South Korea and China. We randomly assigned patients into 3 groups: DAT (aspirin and clopidogrel for 12 months), TAT 1M (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol for 1 month), and TAT 6M (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol for 6 months). The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint did not differ among the 3 groups (8.8% in DAT, 11.0% in TAT 1M, and 11.6% in TAT 6M; hazard ratio for TAT 1M vs DAT, 1.302; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.792-2.141; P = .297; hazard ratio for TAT 6M vs DAT, 1.358; 95% CI, 0.829-2.225; P = .225). With respect to in-hospital outcomes, more bleeding events occurred in the TAT group than in the DAT group (1.3% vs 4.7% vs 2.6%, P = .029), with no significant differences in major bleeding events. Additionally, the TAT group had a higher incidence of headaches (0% vs 1.6% vs 2.6%, P = .020).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of cilostazol to DAT did not reduce the incidence of 1-year MACEs compared with DAT alone. Instead, it may be associated with an increased risk of drug intolerance and side effects, including in-hospital bleeding and headaches.

Implication of diabetic status on platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation: results from the PTRG-DES consortium

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with thrombogenicity, clinically manifested with atherothrombotic events after percutaneous cutaneous intervention (PCI). This study aimed to investigate association between DM status and platelet reactivity, and their prognostic implication in PCI-treated patients.

METHODS

The Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term Prognosis-Platelet Function Test (PTRG-PFT) cohort was established to determine the linkage of platelet function test (PFT) with long-term prognosis during dual antiplatelet therapy including clopidogrel in patients treated with drug-eluting stent (DES). We assessed platelet reactivity using VerifyNow and 'high platelet reactivity (HPR)' was defined as ≥ 252 P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis or stroke.

RESULTS

Between July 2003 and Aug 2018, DES-treated patients with available PFT were enrolled (n = 11,714). Diabetic patients demonstrated significant higher levels of platelet reactivity (DM vs. non-DM: 225.7 ± 77.5 vs. 213.6 ± 79.1 PRU, P < 0.001) and greater prevalence of HPR compared to non-diabetic patients (38.1% vs. 32.0%, P < 0.001). PRU level and prevalence of HPR were significantly associated with insulin requirement and HbA1c level, as well as diabetic status. DM status and HPR phenotype had a similar prognostic implication, which showed the synergistic clinical impact on MACCE. Association between PRU level and MACCE occurrence seemed higher in diabetic vs. non-diabetic patients. In non-DM patients, HPR phenotype did not significantly increase the risk of MACCE (adjusted hazard ratio [HRadj]: 1.073; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.869-1.325; P = 0.511), whereas HPR was an independent determinant for MACCE occurrence among diabetic patients (HRadj: 1.507; 95% CI: 1.193-1.902; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The levels of on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity are determined by diabetic status and the severity of DM. In addition, HPR phenotype significantly increases the risk of MACCE only in diabetic patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov . Unique identifier: NCT04734028.

Sex Differences in Midterm Prognostic Implications of High Platelet Reactivity After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents in East Asian Patients: Results From the PTRG-DES (Platelet Function and Genotype-Related Long-Term Prognosis in Drug-Eluting Stent-Treated Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) Consortium

Background Although high platelet reactivity (HPR) on clopidogrel is associated with higher ischemic events and lower bleeding events in patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents, the differential risk of HPR in East Asian women versus men is unknown. Methods and Results We compared 11 714 patients enrolled in the PTRG-DES (Platelet Function and Genotype-Related Long-Term Prognosis in Drug-Eluting Stent-Treated Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) Consortium according to sex and the presence/absence of HPR on clopidogrel (defined as ≥252 P2Y12 reactivity units). The primary study end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs; comprising all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, and stent thrombosis). HPR was more common in women (46.7%) than in men (28.1%). In propensity-adjusted models, HPR was an independent predictor of MACCEs (men with HPR: hazard ratio [HR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.20-2.12]; women with HPR: HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.69-1.42]) and all-cause mortality (men with HPR: HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.07-2.44]; women with HPR: HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.57-1.50]) in men, although those associations were insignificant among women. In addition, a significant interaction between sex was noted in the associations between HPR and MACCE (Pinteraction=0.013) or all-cause mortality (Pinteraction=0.025). Conclusions In this study, HPR was a differential risk factor for 1-year MACCEs and all-cause mortality in women and men. And it was an independent predictor of 1-year MACCEs and all-cause mortality in men but not in women. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04734028. Registered July 9, 2003, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04734028.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Outcome Impact of Cilostazol in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease or at a High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

Previous studies found that cilostazol has a favorable effect on glucose and lipid homeostasis, endothelial function, atherosclerosis, and vasculo-angiogenesis. However, it is poorly understood whether these effects can translate into better clinical outcomes. This study investigated the outcome effect of cilostazol in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or at a high risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 266 patients who received cilostazol, 200 mg/day (n = 134) or placebo (n = 132). Pre-specified clinical endpoints including composite major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarct, non-fatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or unplanned coronary revascularization), the composite major coronary event (MCE) and major adverse CV and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), were prospectively assessed. The mean duration of follow-up was 2.9 years. Relative to placebo, cilostazol treatment had a borderline effect on risk reduction of MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34–1.33), whereas the beneficial effect in favor of cilostazol was significant in patients with diabetes mellitus or a history of percutaneous coronary intervention (p for interaction, 0.02 and 0.06, respectively). Use of cilostazol, significantly reduced the risk of MCE (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17–0.86) and MACCE (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.23–0.96). A significantly lower risk of angina pectoris (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17–0.86) was also observed in the cilostazol group. After multi-variable adjustment, cilostazol treatment independently predicted a lower risk of MCE. In conclusion, these results suggest cilostazol may have beneficial effects in patients with CAD or at a high risk of CV disease.

Antiplatelet agents for chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet agents are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events. The risks and benefits of antiplatelet agents may be different in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) for whom occlusive atherosclerotic events are less prevalent, and bleeding hazards might be increased. This is an update of a review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents in people with any form of CKD, including those with CKD not receiving renal replacement therapy, patients receiving any form of dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 13 July 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials of any antiplatelet agents versus placebo or no treatment, or direct head-to-head antiplatelet agent studies in people with CKD. Studies were included if they enrolled participants with CKD, or included people in broader at-risk populations in which data for subgroups with CKD could be disaggregated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently extracted data from primary study reports and any available supplementary information for study population, interventions, outcomes, and risks of bias. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from numbers of events and numbers of participants at risk which were extracted from each included study. The reported RRs were extracted where crude event rates were not provided. Data were pooled using the random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 113 studies, enrolling 51,959 participants; 90 studies (40,597 CKD participants) compared an antiplatelet agent with placebo or no treatment, and 29 studies (11,805 CKD participants) directly compared one antiplatelet agent with another. Fifty-six new studies were added to this 2021 update. Seven studies originally excluded from the 2013 review were included, although they had a follow-up lower than two months. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in 16 and 22 studies, respectively. Sixty-four studies reported low-risk methods for blinding of participants and investigators; outcome assessment was blinded in 41 studies. Forty-one studies were at low risk of attrition bias, 50 studies were at low risk of selective reporting bias, and 57 studies were at low risk of other potential sources of bias. Compared to placebo or no treatment, antiplatelet agents probably reduces myocardial infarction (18 studies, 15,289 participants: RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, I² = 0%; moderate certainty). Antiplatelet agents has uncertain effects on fatal or nonfatal stroke (12 studies, 10.382 participants: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.59, I² = 37%; very low certainty) and may have little or no effect on death from any cause (35 studies, 18,241 participants: RR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.84 to 1.06, I² = 14%; low certainty). Antiplatelet therapy probably increases major bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with haemodialysis (HD) (29 studies, 16,194 participants: RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.65, I² = 12%; moderate certainty). In addition, antiplatelet therapy may increase minor bleeding in people with CKD and those treated with HD (21 studies, 13,218 participants: RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.90, I² = 58%; low certainty). Antiplatelet treatment may reduce early dialysis vascular access thrombosis (8 studies, 1525 participants) RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.70; low certainty). Antiplatelet agents may reduce doubling of serum creatinine in CKD (3 studies, 217 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.86, I² = 8%; low certainty). The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents on stroke, cardiovascular death, kidney failure, kidney transplant graft loss, transplant rejection, creatinine clearance, proteinuria, dialysis access failure, loss of primary unassisted patency, failure to attain suitability for dialysis, need of intervention and cardiovascular hospitalisation were uncertain. Limited data were available for direct head-to-head comparisons of antiplatelet drugs, including prasugrel, ticagrelor, different doses of clopidogrel, abciximab, defibrotide, sarpogrelate and beraprost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet agents probably reduced myocardial infarction and increased major bleeding, but do not appear to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular death among people with CKD and those treated with dialysis. The treatment effects of antiplatelet agents compared with each other are uncertain.

Update on Cilostazol: A Critical Review of Its Antithrombotic and Cardiovascular Actions and Its Clinical Applications

Cilostazol, a phosphodiesterase III inhibitor, has vasodilating and antiplatelet properties with a low rate of bleeding complications. It has been used over the past 25 years for improving intermittent claudication in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Cilostazol also has demonstrated efficacy in patients undergoing percutaneous revascularization procedures for both PAD and coronary artery disease. In addition to its antithrombotic and vasodilating actions, cilostazol also inhibits vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation via phosphodiesterase III inhibition, thus mitigating restenosis. Accumulated evidence has shown that cilostazol, due to its "pleiotropic" effects, is a useful, albeit underutilized, agent for both coronary artery disease and PAD. It is also potentially useful after ischemic stroke and is an alternative in those who are allergic or intolerant to classical antithrombotic agents (eg, aspirin or clopidogrel). These issues are herein reviewed together with the pharmacology and pharmacodynamics of cilostazol. Large studies and meta-analyses are presented and evaluated. Current guidelines are also discussed, and the spectrum of cilostazol's actions and therapeutic applications are illustrated.

The East Asian Paradox: An Updated Position Statement on the Challenges to the Current Antithrombotic Strategy in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

East Asian patients have reduced anti-ischemic benefits and increased bleeding risk during antithrombotic therapies compared with Caucasian patients. As potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (e.g., ticagrelor and prasugrel) and direct oral anticoagulants are commonly used in current daily practice, the unique risk-benefit trade-off in East Asians has been a topic of emerging interest. In this article, we propose updated evidence and future directions of antithrombotic treatment in East Asian patients.

Phosphodiesterase Inhibitors: Could They Be Beneficial for the Treatment of COVID-19?

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection to be a pandemic disease. SARS-CoV2 was first identified in China and, despite the restrictive measures adopted, the epidemic has spread globally, becoming a pandemic in a very short time. Though there is growing knowledge of the SARS-CoV2 infection and its clinical manifestations, an effective cure to limit its acute symptoms and its severe complications has not yet been found. Given the worldwide health and economic emergency issues accompanying this pandemic, there is an absolute urgency to identify effective treatments and reduce the post infection outcomes. In this context, phosphodiesterases (PDEs), evolutionarily conserved cyclic nucleotide (cAMP/cGMP) hydrolyzing enzymes, could emerge as new potential targets. Given their extended distribution and modulating role in nearly all organs and cellular environments, a large number of drugs (PDE inhibitors) have been developed to control the specific functions of each PDE family. These PDE inhibitors have already been used in the treatment of pathologies that show clinical signs and symptoms completely or partially overlapping with post-COVID-19 conditions (e.g., thrombosis, inflammation, fibrosis), while new PDE-selective or pan-selective inhibitors are currently under study. This review discusses the state of the art of the different pathologies currently treated with phosphodiesterase inhibitors, highlighting the numerous similarities with the disorders linked to SARS-CoV2 infection, to support the hypothesis that PDE inhibitors, alone or in combination with other drugs, could be beneficial for the treatment of COVID-19.

A 70-Year-Old Female with Unexpected Platelet Function Testing Results

A 70-year-old female with a history of hypertension and left A2 segment aneurysm was scheduled for pipeline embolization device (PED) placement. Preinterventional antiplatelet prophylaxis included aspirin and ticagrelor. Unexpectedly, after 13 days of treatment, VerifyNow showed a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) value of 216, approximately >5 times the mean PRU of other patients on aspirin and ticagrelor. We confirmed platelet reactivity and ticagrelor resistance with light transmission aggregometry. Antiplatelet therapy was switched to prasugrel, and aspirin was continued. Eight days later, the P2Y12 reaction value (PRU) was 164. PED was placed without complications. Unlike clopidogrel, ticagrelor is a direct P2Y12 inhibitor that does not require metabolism to an active metabolite. Ticagrelor resistance is very rarely reported. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no case of ticagrelor resistance reported in the context of pre-PED placement prophylaxis.

Effect of Probucol and/or Cilostazol on Carotid Intima Media Thickness in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Randomized, Multicenter, Multinational Study

Aim: In a prospective randomized multinational open blinded endpoint study, the long-term effects of probucol or probucol and cilostazol with statin on carotid mean intima media thickness (IMT) were evaluated for the first time.

Methods: Hypercholesterolemic patients with coronary artery disease were randomized to three groups and received study drugs for 3 years: the control with statin alone; the probucol group with statin and probucol; and the combo group with statin, probucol, and cilostazol. Primary efficacy endpoint was changes of mean carotid IMT at 3 years. Biomarkers, major adverse cerebro-cardiovascular events (MACCEs) and safety were secondary endpoints.

Results: Two hundred eighty-one patients were randomized into three groups. All three groups showed significant regression of carotid IMT at 3 years compared with baseline. Decrease in mean carotid IMT was significantly greater in the combo group than in the control group at 1 year. However, there were no significant differences in changes of mean carotid IMT between groups at 3 years (control; −0.12 ± 0.36 mm vs. probucol; −0.11 ± 0.32 mm vs. combo; −0.16 ± 0.38 mm). MACCEs were frequent in the control group, but the difference was not significant (control; 10.8% vs. probucol; 4.4% vs. combo; 6.9%, p = 0.35). Probucol and cilostazol were well tolerated in long-term treatment without serious drug-related adverse reactions.

Conclusion: Probucol or probucol and cilostazol with statin did not reduce carotid IMT in comparison with statin alone in this study. However, the clinical outcome of probucol-based treatment with current standard statin treatment may need further studies.

Cilostazol-based triple versus potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Although potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has replaced clopidogrel-based therapy as the standard treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), there is a concern about the risk of bleeding in East Asian patients. We compared the efficacy and safety of cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) with potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based DAPT in Korean patients. A total of 4152 AMI patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: the TAT group (aspirin + clopidogrel + cilostazol, n = 3161) and the potent DAPT group (aspirin + potent P2Y12 inhibitors [ticagrelor or prasugrel], n = 991). Major clinical outcomes at 30 days and 2 years were compared between the two groups using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. After PSM (869 pairs), there were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of total death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke at 30 days and 2 years. However, the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding rates were significantly lower in the TAT group compared with the potent DAPT group at 2 years (6.4% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.006). In Korean AMI patients undergoing PCI, TAT with cilostazol was associated with lower bleeding than the potent P2Y12 inhibitor-based DAPT without increased ischemic risk. These results could provide a rationale for the use of TAT in East Asian AMI patients.

Rationale and design of "Can Very Low Dose Rivaroxaban (VLDR) in addition to dual antiplatelet therapy improve thrombotic status in acute coronary syndrome (VaLiDate-R)" study : A randomised trial modulating endogenous fibrinolysis in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Impaired endogenous fibrinolysis is novel biomarker that can identify patients with ACS at increased cardiovascular risk. The addition of Very Low Dose Rivaroxaban (VLDR) to dual antiplatelet therapy has been shown to reduce cardiovascular events but at a cost of increased bleeding and is therefore not suitable for all-comers. Targeted additional pharmacotherapy with VLDR to improve endogenous fibrinolysis may improve outcomes in high-risk patients, whilst avoiding unnecessary bleeding in low-risk individuals. The VaLiDate-R study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03775746, EudraCT: 2018-003299-11) is an investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, single centre trial comparing the effect of 3 antithrombotic regimens on endogenous fibrinolysis in 150 patients with ACS. Subjects whose screening blood test shows impaired fibrinolytic status (lysis time > 2000s), will be randomised to one of 3 treatment arms in a 1:1:1 ratio: clopidogrel 75 mg daily (Group 1); clopidogrel 75 mg daily plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (Group 2); ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily (Group 3), in addition to aspirin 75 mg daily. Rivaroxaban will be given for 30 days. Fibrinolytic status will be assessed during admission and at 2, 4 and 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the change in fibrinolysis time from admission to 4 weeks follow-up, using the Global Thrombosis Test. If VLDR can improve endogenous fibrinolysis in ACS, future large-scale studies would be required to assess whether targeted use of VLDR in patients with ACS and impaired fibrinolysis can translate into improved clinical outcomes, with reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events in this high-risk cohort.

Comparison of Shear Stress-Induced Thrombotic and Thrombolytic Effects Among 3 Different Antithrombotic Regimens in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

Shear stress (SS)-induced platelet activation is suggested as an essential mechanism of the acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to compare SS-induced thrombotic and thrombolytic activities among 3 treatment regimens in patients with ACS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Patients were nonrandomly enrolled and treated with one of 3 regimens (TICA: ticagrelor 180 mg/d; RIVA: clopidogrel 75 mg/d and rivaroxaban 5 mg/d; CLP: clopidogrel 75 mg/d), administered in addition to aspirin (100 mg/d) for 30 days. The global thrombosis test was applied to measure SS-induced thrombotic (occlusion time [OT]) and thrombolytic activity (lysis time [LT]) at day 2 and 30. Aspirin reaction unit (ARU) and P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) were simultaneously measured using VerifyNow. Group differences in the OT, LT, ARU, and PRU were evaluated. Seventy-five patients (25 patients in each group) finished 30 days of follow-up. Clinical and angiographic characteristics did not differ among the 3 groups, except ACS subtype and pre-PCI coronary flow. No major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in any group during follow-up. The OT and LT did not differ among the 3 groups at day 30 (OT: TICA, 447.2 ± 87.1 vs RIVA, 458.5 ± 70.3, vs CLP, 471.9 ± 90.7, LT: 1522.3 ± 426.5 vs 1734.6 ± 454.3 vs 1510.2 ± 593.9) despite significant differences in the PRU among the 3 groups. Shear stress-induced thrombotic and thrombolytic activities did not differ among the 3 investigated antithrombotic treatments.

Temporal Variability of Platelet Reactivity in Patients Treated with Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor

Background and Objectives

The degree of antiplatelet response to P2Y12 inhibitors has been associated with clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to test the variability of platelet reactivity over time among patients treated with clopidogrel or ticagrelor.

Methods

A single-center cohort of acute coronary syndrome patients that underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was analyzed. Platelet reactivity was measured at baseline, 48 hours after PCI, 1 month, and 6 months after clopidogrel (n=79) or ticagrelor (n=93) treatment. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as ≥47 U, assessed by multiple electrode platelet aggregometry.

Results

Platelet reactivity in the clopidogrel group increased over time, 38.2±21.7 U at 48 hours, 41.4±22.3 U at 1 month, and 44.7±25.5 U at 6 months (p=0.018, 48 hours to 6 months). However, platelet reactivity in the ticagrelor group was not significantly changed, 21.4±12.6 U at 48 hours, 20.0±12.2 U at 1 month, and 22.8±13.8 U at 6 months (p=0.392). A platelet reactivity change over time of more than 20U was found in 67.1% of the patients with clopidogrel group and 34.4% of ticagrelor group (p<0.001). Between 48 hours and 6 months, 43% of patients changed their responder status in the clopidogrel group, and 13% in the ticagrelor group (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Although ticagrelor treatment resulted in less temporal variability of platelet reactivity than clopidogrel treatment in terms of HPR, platelet reactivity varied over time in a significant proportion of patients.

Outcomes with cilostazol after endovascular therapy of peripheral artery disease

The role of cilostazol after endovascular therapy (EVT) of peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis for all studies reporting the outcomes of cilostazol after EVT of PAD from January 2000 through November 2018 with the outcomes of interest including primary patency, major adverse limb events (MALE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major amputation. We included eight studies (three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five observational studies) with a total of 3846 patients (4713 lesions). During a mean follow-up duration of 12.5 ± 5 months, the use of cilostazol was associated with higher primary patency (OR 2.28, 95% CI (1.77, 2.94), p < 0.001, I² = 24%), lower risk of TLR (OR 0.37, 95% CI (0.26, 0.52), p < 0.001, I² = 0%), and lower risk of major amputation (OR 0.15, 95% CI (0.04, 0.62), p = 0.008, I² = 0%). The use of cilostazol in RCTs was associated with significantly higher odds of primary patency compared with observational studies (OR 3.37 vs 2.28, p-interaction = 0.03). After further subgroup analysis, cilostazol remained associated with higher primary patency regardless of the use of anticoagulants (warfarin) (p-interaction = 0.49). We conclude that the use of cilostazol after EVT of femoropopliteal and iliac lesions is associated with improved primary patency and lower risk of major amputation and TLR. The favorable impact of cilostazol is independent of the use of warfarin. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42018092715.

Effects of Cilostazol-Based Triple Antiplatelet Therapy Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: An Updated Meta-Analysis of the Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The results of studies on cilostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy (TAT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation were inconsistent. To assess the effects of TAT compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) after DES/second-generation DES implantation, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

All relevant studies evaluated were identified by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science databases without time and language limitation. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TAT after second-generation DES implantation.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs involving a total of 4684 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed TAT was associated with significant beneficial effects on angiographic findings of in-stent restenosis [risk ratio (RR) 0.645, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.470-0.885; P = 0.007], in-segment restenosis (RR 0.606, 95% CI 0.450-0.817; P = 0.001), in-stent late loss (RR - 0.095, 95% CI - 0.136 to - 0.054; P < 0.0001), in-segment late loss (RR - 0.100, 95% CI - 0.139 to - 0.061; P < 0.0001), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR 0.570, 95% CI 0.430-0.755; P < 0.0001), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR 0.523, 95% CI 0.380-0.719; P < 0.0001). No significant difference was found in outcomes of all-cause death, cardiac death, definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), overall bleeding, and major bleeding between the two groups, as well as some minor adverse effects including palpitations, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and hepatic dysfunction. However, the incidence rate of rash, gastrointestinal disorders, and headache was significantly higher in TAT. The second-generation DES subgroup showed similar results, except for the indicators of all-cause death (RR 2.161, 95% CI 1.007-4.635; P = 0.048) and hepatic dysfunction (RR 0.176, 95% CI 0.031-0.995; P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with DAT, cilostazol-based TAT can significantly improve the angiographic findings of in-stent and in-segment late loss, in-stent and in-segment restenosis, TLR, and TVR after DES/second-generation DES implantation. However, no benefits were observed in outcomes of all-cause death, cardiac death, ST, and MI.

2018 update of expert consensus statement on antiplatelet therapy in East Asian patients with ACS or undergoing PCI

East Asians are the most populous race in the world and their health status is an important global issue. Compared with Caucasian populations, East Asian patients have a different benefit/risk ratio when using antithrombotic treatment. Despite this observation, treatment strategies in East Asian patients are mostly based on the American and European guidelines. Despite a lower platelet inhibitory response to clopidogrel, East Asian patients show a similar or even a lower rate of ischemic event occurrence and higher bleeding risk compared with Caucasian patients. For potent P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (ticagrelor and prasugrel), East Asian patients have shown less favorable net clinical benefits compared with Caucasian patients, which may be related to differences in pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and therapeutic zone of antiplatelet effect. This updated consensus mainly focuses on state-of-the-art and current controversies in the East Asian population. In addition, when East Asian patients are administered potent P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitors, the strategies and ongoing trials to overcome the related hurdles are discussed.

DAPT Plus Cilostazol is Better Than Traditional DAPT or Aspirin Plus Ticagrelor as Elective PCI for Intermediate-to-Highly Complex Cases: Prospective, Randomized, PRU-Based Study in Taiwan

PURPOSE

Current treatment guidelines do not recommend different antiplatelet treatments for patients in different coronary risk categories; nor do they consider ethnic differences in responses to individual drugs.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a prospective, single-blind, randomized, comparative study of Taiwanese patients with stable angina and scheduled stent implantation for intermediate-to-highly complex coronary lesions and compared the platelet reactivity unit (PRU) levels and 24-month outcomes of groups receiving three different antiplatelet treatments.

METHODS

Patients (N = 334) were randomized into three treatment groups (aspirin + clopidogrel, aspirin + ticagrelor, or aspirin + clopidogrel + cilostazol) for 6 months of treatment and were then switched to aspirin only. PRU levels were determined 24 h, 7 days, and 1 month after stent implantation. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were recorded over 24 months.

RESULTS

Clopidogrel treatment reached full effect after 1 month. Ticagrelor decreased PRU levels more than did clopidogrel but often to levels that increased the risk of hemorrhage. The addition of cilostazol to clopidogrel decreased PRU levels earlier and more strongly than clopidogrel alone but not as strongly as did ticagrelor. Ticagrelor treatment caused fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and more episodes of minor bleeding than the other two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Clopidogrel appears safer than ticagrelor in Taiwanese patients with stable angina after stent implantation for intermediate-to-highly complex coronary lesions. The addition of cilostazol to clopidogrel may provide a more rapid decrease in PRU to therapeutic levels without increasing the risk of hemorrhage.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02101411.

The Dipyridamole Added to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Cerebral Infarction After First Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Nationwide, Case-Control Study

Background and Purpose: No previous study has compared the impact of dipyridamole-based triple antiplatelet therapy on secondary stroke prevention and long-term outcomes to that of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and previous stroke. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of dipyridamole added to DAPT on stroke prevention and long-term outcomes in patients with cerebral infarction after first AMI.

Methods: This nationwide, case-control study included 75,789 patients with cerebral infarction after first AMI. A 1:4 propensity score matching ratio was adopted based on multiple variables. Finally, the data of 4,468 patients included in the DAPT group and 1,117 patients included in the Dipyridamole-DAPT group were analyzed. Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were cumulative event rate of recurrent MI or stroke, and cumulative intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and gastrointestinal bleeding rate.

Results: Long-term survival rate was comparable between the two groups (log-rank P = 0.1117), regardless of sex analyses. However, after first year, DAPT subgroup revealed better survival over DAPT-dipyridamole subgroup (log-rank P = 0.0188). In age subgroup analysis, a lower survival rate was detected in younger patients from the Dipyridamole-DAPT group after first year (log-rank P = 0.0151), but no survival difference for older patients. No benefit of Dipyridamole-DAPT was detected for patients after AMI, regardless of the myocardial infarction type. DAPT was superior to Dipyridamole-DAPT in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (log-rank P = 0.0153) and ST elevation myocardial infarction after first year (log-rank P = 0.0019). Dipyridamole-DAPT did not reduce cumulative event rate of recurrent MI or stroke in patients after AMI. Moreover, Dipyridamole-DAPT increased the cumulative ICH rate (log-rank P = 0.0026), but did not affect the cumulative event rate of gastrointestinal bleeding. In Cox analysis, dipyridamole did not improve long-term survival.

Conclusions: This nationwide study showed that Dipyridamole-DAPT, compared with DAPT, did not improve long-term survival in patients with stroke after AMI, and was related to poor outcomes after 1 year. Dipyridamole-DAPT did not reduce recurrent rate of MI or stroke, but increased the ICH rate without impacting the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding.

Effect of tailored use of tirofiban in patients with Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial

Background

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to investigate whether an additional platelet inhibition with tirofiban would reduce the extent of myocardial damage and prevent periprocedural myonecrosis in patients with Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) with a high residual platelet activity (HPR).

Methods

Patients with an HPR, defined as P₂Y₁₂ reaction unit (PRU) > 230, were randomly assigned to group A (tirofiban treatment, n = 30) or C1 (n = 30) and patients without an HPR to C2 (n = 78). Periprocedural myocardial damage was assessed using the area under the curve (AUC) of serial cardiac enzyme levels from the time of the procedure to post-36 h. Periprocedural myonecrosis incidence was evaluated.

Results

The troponin I AUC was not different between the groups (197.2 [41.5395.7], 37.9 [8.9313.9], 121.3 [43.7481.8] h∙ng/mL; p = 0.088). The results did not change when the baseline levels were adjusted (365.3 [279.5, 451.1], 293.0 [207.1, 379.0], and 298.0 [244.7, 351.3] h∙ng/mL; p = 0.487). The rate of periprocedural myonecrosis was also not different between the groups (53.0% vs. 50.0% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.092). The CK-MB isoenzyme analysis showed similar results. No difference in complications was noted.

Conclusion

Additional tirofiban administration was not beneficial to patients with NSTE-ACS even with an HPR.

Trial registration

Clinical trial no. NCT03114995, registered 11 April, 2017, retrospectively.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-018-0938-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Platelet Signaling and Disease: Targeted Therapy for Thrombosis and Other Related Diseases

Platelets are essential for clotting in the blood and maintenance of normal hemostasis. Under pathologic conditions such as atherosclerosis, vascular injury often results in hyperactive platelet activation, resulting in occlusive thrombus formation, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Recent work in the field has elucidated a number of platelet functions unique from that of maintaining hemostasis, including regulation of tumor growth and metastasis, inflammation, infection, and immune response. Traditional therapeutic targets for inhibiting platelet activation have primarily been limited to cyclooxygenase-1, integrin αIIbβ3, and the P2Y12 receptor. Recently identified signaling pathways regulating platelet function have made it possible to develop novel approaches for pharmacological intervention in the blood to limit platelet reactivity. In this review, we cover the newly discovered roles for platelets as well as their role in hemostasis and thrombosis. These new roles for platelets lend importance to the development of new therapies targeted to the platelet. Additionally, we highlight the promising receptor and enzymatic targets that may further decrease platelet activation and help to address the myriad of pathologic conditions now known to involve platelets without significant effects on hemostasis.

Stent thrombosis associated with drug eluting stents on addition of cilostazol to the standard dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials

Background

In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare stent thrombosis (ST) and its different subtypes following treatment with DAPT (aspirin + clopidogrel) versus TAPT (aspirin + clopidogrel + cilostazol).

Methods

Studies were included if: they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TAPT (cilostazol + aspirin + clopidogrel) with DAPT (aspirin + clopidogrel); they reported ST or its subtype including definite, probable, acute, sub-acute and late ST as their clinical outcomes. RevMan software (version 5.3) was used to carry out this analysis whereby odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated.

Results

Statistical analysis of the data showed no significant difference in total ST with the addition of cilostazol to the standard DAPT with OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.38–1.10; P = 0.11, I² = 6%. Moreover, when ST was further subdivided and analyzed, still, no significant difference was observed in acute, sub-acute, late, definite and probable ST with OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.13–1.74; P = 0.27, I² = 0%, OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.22–1.40; P = 0.21, I² = 0%, OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.23–2.28; P = 0.58, I² = 0%, OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.38–3.69; P = 0.77, I² = 3% and OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.17–3.55; P = 0.70, I² = 0% respectively. No change was observed during a short term (≤ 6 months) and a longer (≥ 1 year) follow-up time period.

Conclusions

This current analysis showed no significant difference in stent thrombosis with the addition of cilostazol to the standard dual antiplatelet therapy during any follow-up time period after PCI.

Comparison of antiplatelet treatment in patients with clopidogrel nonresponders with or without carriage of CYP2C19 polymorphism

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Several interventions exist for overcoming high platelet reactivity (HPR) on clopidogrel therapy. The goal of this study was to identify strategies that improve inhibition of platelet reactivity in clopidogrel nonresponders with or without loss of function CYP2C19 genotypes, resulting in platelet reactivity similar to that in responders.

METHODS

A total of 376 patients with stenting for coronary artery disease underwent platelet function testing in three centers. Blinded platelet function tests were performed after 75 mg daily clopidogrel treatment for 28 days. In total, 183 nonresponders were genotyped, were randomized to four treatment groups with each treatment lasting approximately 28 days, and underwent repeated measurements of platelet reactivity after treatment.

RESULTS

With 75 mg of daily clopidogrel, nonresponders had significantly higher HPR than did responders (multiple electrode aggregometry [MEA, arbitrary platelet aggregation unit]: mean, 71.4; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 68.6 to 74.3; and mean, 27.5; 95% CI, 26.0 to 28.9, respectively; p < 0.001). Ticagrelor or ticlopidine treatment in nonresponders resulted in platelet reactivity similar to that in responders in intermediate metabolizers (mean, 24.0; 95% CI, 19.6 to 28.4; p > 0.05; and mean, 30.0; 95% CI, 24.7 to 37.5; p > 0.05, respectively) and poor metabolizers (mean, 23.2; 95% CI, 18.0 to 28.3; p > 0.05; and mean, 30.3; 95% CI, 24.5 to 6.0; p > 0.05, respectively). However, in extensive metabolizers, only ticagrelor treatment showed platelet reactivity similar to that in responders (mean, 26.1; 95% CI, 24.1 to 28.0; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Among clopidogrel nonresponders with cardiovascular disease on 75 mg daily clopidogrel, ticagrelor resulted in a comparable degree of platelet inhibition in all nonresponders compared with 150 mg daily clopidogrel or triple therapy with clopidogrel and cilostazol, irrespective of phenotype.

Effects of genetic variants on platelet reactivity and one-year clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: A prospective multicentre registry study

Clopidogrel is the mainstay for antiplatelet treatment after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The relationship of platelet reactivity and genetic polymorphism with clinical outcomes with newer-generation drug-eluting stents is unclear. We analysed 4,587 patients for the most powerful single-nucleotide polymorphisms (CYP2C19, CYP2C9, ABCB1, PON1, and P2Y12) related to on-treatment platelet reactivity (OPR). The optimal cut-off value of high OPR for major adverse thrombotic events was 266. CYP2C19 was significantly associated with high OPR and the number of CYP2C19*R (*2 or *3) alleles was proportional to the increased risk of high OPR. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, stent thrombosis, and bleeding events were assessed during a 1-year follow-up period. Primary endpoints were death and non-fatal MI. The cumulative 1-year incidence of death and stent thrombosis was significantly higher in patients with CYP2C19*2/*2, CYP2C19*2/*3, and CYP2C19*3/*3 (Group 3) than in patients with CYP2C19*1/*1 (Group 1). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard model showed that cardiac death risk was significantly higher in Group 3 than in Group 1 (hazard ratio 2.69, 95% confidence interval 1.154–6.263, p = 0.022). No association was reported between bleeding and OPR. Thus, CYP2C19 may exert a significant impact on the prognosis of PCI patients even in the era of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.

The Evolving Concept of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Focus on Unique Feature of East Asian and "Asian Paradox"

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor is essential after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), while many studies have focused on determining the optimal degree of platelet inhibition and optimal DAPT duration to minimize complications after PCI. Current guidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and the European Society of Cardiology summarize previous studies and provide recommendations. However, these guidelines are mainly based on Western patients, and their characteristics might differ from those of East Asian patients. Previous data suggested that East Asian patients have unique features with regard to the response to antiplatelet agents. On comparing Western and East Asian patients, it was found that East Asian patients have a lower rate of ischemic events and higher rate of bleeding events after PCI, despite a higher on-treatment platelet reactivity, which is referred to as the “East Asian paradox.” As the main purpose of DAPT is to minimize ischemic and bleeding complications after PCI, these differences should be clarified before adopting the guidelines for East Asian patients. Therefore, in this article, we will review various issues regarding DAPT in East Asian patients, with a focus on the unique characteristics of East Asian patients, previous studies regarding antiplatelet agents in East Asian patients, and a guideline from an East Asian perspective.

Cigarette Smoking Does Not Enhance Clopidogrel Responsiveness After Adjusting VerifyNow P2Y12 Reaction Unit for the Influence of Hemoglobin Level

OBJECTIVES

The authors performed this analysis to examine whether the enhanced clopidogrel responsiveness in current smokers is maintained after adjusting the influence of hemoglobin on VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU).

BACKGROUND

PRU is consistently reported to be lower in current smokers. However, PRU has a significant inverse relationship with hemoglobin level, and smokers have higher hemoglobin levels. Because the association between PRU and hemoglobin is likely to be an in vitro phenomenon, we hypothesized that the observed difference in PRU between nonsmokers and current smokers is the result of confounding effect of hemoglobin rather than true difference in platelet reactivity.

METHODS

Three cohorts were combined for the analysis (SNUBH [Seoul National University Bundang Hospital], n = 459; CILON-T [influence of CILostazol-based triple antiplatelet therapy ON ischemic complication after drug-eluting stenT implantation], n = 715; HOST-ASSURE [Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery stenosis - sAfety & effectiveneSS of drug-elUting stents & antiplatelet REgimen], n = 1,357). The final combined cohort consisted of 1,314 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and had VerifyNow P2Y12 assay results. General linear model (analysis of covariance) was used to control the effect of hemoglobin on PRU.

RESULTS

A significant inverse correlation was observed between PRU and hemoglobin (r = -0.389; p < 0.001). Current smokers showed a significantly higher hemoglobin level (13.5 ± 1.6 vs. 14.4 ± 1.5; p < 0.001) but lower PRU level (230.1 ± 90.7 vs. 212.2 ± 83.6; p < 0.001). After adjusting the influence of hemoglobin on PRU, there was no difference in PRU between nonsmokers and current smokers (224.1 [95% confidence interval: 218.7 to 229.5] vs. 225.3 [95% confidence interval: 217.2 to 233.3]; p = 0.813).

CONCLUSIONS

The observed difference in PRU between nonsmokers and current smokers is largely attributable to the difference in hemoglobin level. Enhanced clopidogrel responsiveness in cigarette smokers is not confirmed in this study and the concept of the smokers' paradox needs further validation.

A laboratory association between hemoglobin and VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

VerifyNow P2Y12 assay is used widely to evaluate residual platelet reactivity in patients taking P2Y12 receptor antagonists. However, a laboratory association between VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and hemoglobin, which might lead to wrong interpretation of the data, is reported. We performed these systematic review and meta-analysis to clearly define the relationship between PRU and hemoglobin and to elucidate whether the relationship, if any, is a true biological association or is just a laboratory error.

METHODS

Through a comprehensive electronic and manual search, 10 studies were selected for the cohort level meta-analysis. Among 10 studies, we were able to retrieve the raw data of 5 studies, and a patient-level meta-analysis was performed. Potential publication bias was searched by funnel plot analysis and was actively adjusted, if present, by trim and fill method.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis revealed a significant inverse correlation between PRU and hemoglobin (r=-0.349; P<.001; 10 studies with 4,793 patients). VerifyNow P2Y12 base unit, which reflects off-drug platelet reactivity, was also inversely correlated with hemoglobin (r=-0.526; P<.001; 8 studies with 4,395 patients). % Inhibition (r=0.081; P=.059; 6 studies with 3,832 patients) and ΔPRU (r=-0.037; P=.188; 5 studies with 3,521 patients) were not associated with hemoglobin. A significant inverse association between PRU and hemoglobin was also observed in the patient-level meta-analysis (3,533 patients pooled from 5 studies; r=-0.335; P<.001). Light transmission aggregometry (r=0.160; P=.072; 4 studies with 1,144 patients) and multiple electrode platelet aggregometry (r=-0.029; P=.394; 3 studies with 7,645 patients) showed no significant association with hemoglobin.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant inverse association was observed between PRU and hemoglobin which is likely to be a laboratory error. Clinicians should be aware that this association might lead to wrong interpretation of the data.

Outcome of Triple Antiplatelet Therapy Including Cilostazol in Elderly Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction who Underwent Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results from the INTERSTELLAR Registry

OBJECTIVES

Compared with dual antiplatelet therapy including aspirin and clopidogrel, triple antiplatelet therapy including cilostazol has a mortality benefit in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. However, whether the mortality benefit persists in elderly patients is not clear.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2014, 1278 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into four groups by age (<75 or ≥75 years; young and elderly, respectively) and antiplatelet strategy (triple or dual antiplatelet therapy). We compared the mortality rates between the triple and dual antiplatelet therapy groups.

RESULTS

There were 1052 (male, 85%; mean age, 56.3 ± 10.4 years) patients in the young group and 241 (male, 52.7%; mean age, 80.3 ± 4.5 years) patients in the elderly group. In the young and elderly groups, 220 (20.9%) and 28 (12.3%) patients were treated with triple antiplatelet therapy. During a 1-year follow-up period, 80 patients died (4.2% in the young group vs. 15.5% in the elderly group). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that triple antiplatelet therapy was associated with a lower mortality rate in the young group (log-rank, p = 0.005). Although there were more angiographic high-risk patients in the elderly group, similar mortality rates were reported (log-rank, p = 0.803) without increased bleeding rates (1 vs. 3.6% in the elderly group, p = 0.217).

CONCLUSIONS

Triple antiplatelet therapy might be a better antiplatelet regimen than dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Although this benefit was strong in patients aged <75 years, no definite increase in major bleeding was seen for elderly patients (aged ≥75 years).

A randomized clinical trial comparing long-term clopidogrel vs aspirin monotherapy beyond dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting coronary stent implantation: Design and rationale of the Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery stenosis-Extended Antiplatelet Monotherapy (HOST-EXAM) trial

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been developed by drug-eluting stent (DES), but stent implantation has brought the issue of stent thrombosis and optimal antiplatelet therapy. Guidelines recommend at least 6- to 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor such as clopidogrel. Beyond DAPT after PCI with DES, however, there has been still a debate for antiplatelet regimen. Therefore, we report on the upcoming HOST-EXAM trial (NCT02044250), which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspirin and clopidogrel monotherapies beyond DAPT after DES implantation.

TRIAL DESIGN

The HOST-EXAM is a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter, comparative effectiveness trial, to compare between clopidogrel (75 mg once daily) and aspirin (100 mg once daily) as long-term antiplatelet agents. A total of 5,530 patients with no clinical events during combined antiplatelet therapy for 12±6 months after index PCI will be screened, enrolled, and randomized to either group (1:1 ratio) receiving antiplatelet monotherapy for 2 years. The primary endpoint will be the rate of clinical events defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding at 24 months after randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

The HOST-EXAM will be the first large-scale randomized controlled study to directly compare the efficacy and safety of long-term antiplatelet monotherapy beyond DAPT after DES implantation. This study will provide clinical evidence to establish optimal regimen for long-term antiplatelet therapy after DES implantation.

Genetic Polymorphism of CYP2C19 and Inhibitory Effects of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel Towards Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Platelet Aggregation in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes

Background

The aim of this study was to observe the effects of genetic polymorphism of CYP2C19 on inhibitory effects of ticagrelor (Tic) and clopidogrel (Clo) towards post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) platelet aggregation (IPA) and major cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

Material/Methods

From August 2013 to March 2014, 166 patients with ACS undergoing PCI were selected. The patients were randomly grouped into the Tic group and the Clo group. IPA was detected by thromboelastography (TEG) at 1 week after taking the pills. Genotyping of CYP2C19 gene was determined by analysis of gene sequence detection. Patients were followed up for 1 month and MACE was observed.

Results

The total IPA in the Clo group was significantly increased compared with the Tic group (P<0.05). The IPAs in the 3 subgroups of Clo group were all significantly increased compared with the 3 subgroups of the Tic group (all P<0.05). MACE was not significantly different between Clo and Tic groups (P>0.05). MACE had no significant difference among the 3 subgroups of the Tic group (P>0.05). MACE in the low metabolism subgroup of the Clo group was significantly increased compared with the fast metabolism subgroup and middle metabolism subgroup of Clo group (P<0.05). MACE was not significant different between the fast metabolism subgroup and the middle metabolism subgroup of the Clo group (P>0.05). MACE in the low metabolism subgroup of the Tic group was significantly decreased compared with the low metabolism subgroup of the Clo group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Ticagrelor has a better effect on inhibition platelet aggregation than Clopidogrel in ACS patients undergoing PCI.

Antiplatelet agents in hemodialysis

Patients affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD) are treated with antiplatelet agents (AA) and/or anticoagulant drugs, which are fundamental in the management of stroke, coronary atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular disease and atrial fibrillation. CVD is the most important cause of death in chronic renal failure (CRF). Death rates from myocardial infarction (MI) and from all other cardiac causes exceed those for the general population. Incidence of MI in CRF is triple that in the general population. Moreover, mortality is seven- to eight-fold higher in patients requiring chronic hemodialysis compared to the general population, and approximately 40% of deaths in this population are attributable to coronary artery disease (CAD). For these reasons, AA are widely used in patients affected by CRF. Current data do not support a protective effect of antiplatelet administration in hemodialytic patients as primary prevention of cardiovascular mortality. Different results have been obtained concerning secondary prevention of CVD. The Cooperative Cardiovascular Project demonstrated that dialysis patients treated with aspirin following MI had a 43% lower mortality. Another study reported that the use of aspirin and beta-blockers following MI was associated with lower mortality in CRF patients. However, aspirin plus clopidogrel seems to increase the hemorrhagic risk without a significant reduction in cardiovascular mortality and there are insufficient data to support the use of new AA drugs in hemodialytic patients. In conclusion, since CRF patients are one of the groups at highest risk for atherosclerotic events, it could be reasonable to use aspirin in HD patients. However, the bleeding risk in HD patients needs to be strongly evaluated, especially before starting dual AA treatment.

Relationship between ADP-induced platelet-fibrin clot strength and anti-platelet responsiveness in ticagrelor treated ACS patients

BACKGROUND

Ticagrelor provides enhanced antiplatelet efficacy but increased risk of bleeding and dyspnea. This study aimed to display the relationship between ADP-induced platelet-fibrin clot strength (MAADP) and clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated by ticagrelor.

METHODS

Consecutive Chinese-Han patients with ACS who received maintenance dose of ticagrelor on top of aspirin were recruited. After 5-day ticagrelor maintenance treatment, MAADP measured by thrombelastography (TEG) were recorded for the evaluation of ticagrelor anti-platelet reactivity. Pre-specified cutoffs of MAADP > 47 mm for high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) and MAADP < 31 mm for low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LTPR) were applied for evaluation. The occurrences of primary ischemic cardiovascular events (including a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke), the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) defined bleeding events, and ticagrelor related dyspnea were recorded after a follow-up of three months.

RESULTS

Overall, 176 ACS patients (Male: 79.55%, Age: 59.91 ± 10.54 years) under ticagrelor maintenance treatment were recruited. The value of MAADP ranged from 4.80% to 72.90% (21.27% ± 12.07% on average), with the distribution higher skewed towards the lower values. Using the pre-specific cutoffs for HTPR and LTPR, seven patients (3.98%) were identified as HTPR and 144 patients (81.82%) as LTPR. After a follow-up of three months in 172 patients, major cardiovascular events occurred in no patient, but TIMI bleeding events in 81 (47.09%) with major bleedings in three patients. All patients with major bleedings were classified as LTPR. Ticagrelor related dyspnea occurred in 31 (18.02%) patients, with 30 (21.28%) classified as LTPR and no one as HTPR (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In ticagrelor treated ACS patients, MAADP measured by TEG might be valuable for the prediction of major bleeding and ticagrelor related dyspnea. Due to the small number of patients with HTPR after ticagrelor maintenance treatment, larger scale study should be warranted to verify the relationship between MAADP defined HTPR and ticagrelor related ischemic events.

Flow Diversion for Intracranial Aneurysm Management: A New Standard of Care

Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with complex morphologies such as giant, wide-necked, or fusiform aneurysms is challenging. Stent-assisted coiling and balloon-assisted coiling are alternative techniques to treat such complex aneurysms, but studies have shown less-than-expected efficacy, as suggested by their high rate of recanalization. The management of complex aneurysms via microsurgery or conventional neuroendovascular strategies has traditionally been poor. However, over the last few years, flow-diverting stents (FDS) have revolutionized the treatment of such aneurysms. FDS are implanted within the parent artery rather than the aneurysm sac. By modifying intra-aneurysmal and parent-vessel flow dynamics at the aneurysm/parent vessel interface, FDS trigger a cascade of gradual intra-aneurysmal thrombosis. As endothelialization of the FDS is complete, the parent vessel reconstructs while preserving the patency of normal perforators and side branch vessels. As with any intervention, the practice and application of flow-diversion technology is inherent, with risks that include vessel rupture or perforation, in-stent thrombosis, perforator occlusion, procedural and delayed hemorrhages, and perianeurysmal edema. Herein, we review the devices, their mechanisms of actions, clinical applications, complications, and ongoing studies.