Antithrombotic management in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention requiring oral anticoagulation

Impact of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in real-world practice

OBJECTIVE

The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients on oral anticoagulation (OAC) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OAC plus clopidogrel with or without aspirin in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from an international, multi-center registry between 2003 and 2014 (n = 15,401). Patients with ACS and receiving OAC after PCI were screened. The composite primary endpoint was 1-year all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding.

RESULTS

The final analysis enrolled 642 patients including 62 patients (9.7%) with OAC and clopidogrel (dual therapy), and 580 patients (90.3%) with the combination of aspirin, OAC and clopidogrel (triple therapy). Patients on triple therapy were more often female and were more likely to have comorbidities. There was no significant difference regarding the primary end point between dual therapy with triple therapy patients [17.74% vs. 17.24%; unadjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.035; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.556-1.929; adjusted HR: 1.026; 95% CI: 0.544-1.937]. However, the re-infarction rate was significantly higher in dual therapy than triple therapy patients (14.52% vs. 5.34%; unadjusted HR: 2.807; 95% CI: 1.329-5.928; adjusted HR: 2.333; 95% CI: 1.078-5.047). In addition, there was no difference between two regimes in all-cause death and severe bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life patients with ACS following PCI and with an indication of OAC, triple therapy was not associated with an increased rate of adverse outcomes compared to dual therapy. Moreover, it decreased risk of re-infarction and did not increase risk of severe bleeding.

Current Use of Oral Anticoagulants and Prognostic Analysis in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Coronary Stenting

Background:

It is currently believed that triple oral antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be recommended if there are no contraindications. However, selecting triple therapy for AF patients undergoing PCI is still challenging when bleeding risk is considered. This study aimed to investigate the current use of oral anticoagulants (Vitamin K antagonists [VKA]) and perform prognostic analysis in real-world patients with AF undergoing coronary stenting.

Methods:

A total of 276 consecutive coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with or without AF undergoing coronary stenting were retrospectively evaluated and analyzed. The univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to explore the current use of VKA and prognosis of patients with AF undergoing coronary stenting. The primary end-point was composite of all-cause death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, serious bleeding events, unplanned repeat revascularization, and worsening heart failure at 12-month follow-up after coronary stenting.

Results:

AF patients undergoing coronary stenting have more clinical concomitant diseases. Only 9.0% AF patients after coronary stenting received triple antithrombotic therapy (VKA, aspirin, and clopidogrel) at discharge. AF was independently associated with increased risk of the 12-month composite end-points (relative risk = 5.732, 95% confidence interval 1.786–18.396, P = 0.003).

Conclusions:

In real-life AF patients undergoing coronary stenting, guideline-recommended VKA was less used. AF patients had adjusted worse prognosis during 12-month follow-up after discharge. It is of utmost importance to improve the current status of oral anticoagulants use.