Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with Severe Renal Insufficiency Undergoing PCI for Acute Coronary Syndrome

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of interventional cardiology Pub Date : 2022-07-31 DOI:10.1155/2022/6476777
Yunxian Chen, Shaowen Tu, Zhixin Chen, Jue Xia, Baofeng Chen, Jinfeng Chen, Jiarong Liang, Xiangyang Liu, Liangqiu Tang
{"title":"Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with Severe Renal Insufficiency Undergoing PCI for Acute Coronary Syndrome","authors":"Yunxian Chen,&nbsp;Shaowen Tu,&nbsp;Zhixin Chen,&nbsp;Jue Xia,&nbsp;Baofeng Chen,&nbsp;Jinfeng Chen,&nbsp;Jiarong Liang,&nbsp;Xiangyang Liu,&nbsp;Liangqiu Tang","doi":"10.1155/2022/6476777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Background</i>. Current guidelines recommend the use of potent antiplatelet agents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, data about optimal platelet inhibition in severe renal insufficiency patients are scarce. The purpose of this study is to determine if ticagrelor is more effective than clopidogrel in patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency treated with PCI. <i>Methods</i>. We retrospectively enrolled patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency (eGFR ≤ 30 ml/min·1.73 m<sup>2</sup> or dialysis) who underwent PCI at our hospital between January 2015 and March 2020. We used the adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to analyze the 1-year outcome endpoints, including the primary endpoint (the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrence of MI, or nonfatal ischemic stroke), death from any cause, and bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium, BARC criteria). <i>Results</i>. A total of 276 patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency who were treated with PCI with ticagrelor (<i>n</i> = 108) or clopidogrel (<i>n</i> = 168) were included in the study. After adjustment, there was no statistical difference in risk of the primary endpoint (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.46–1.33; <i>P</i> = 0.367) and death from any cause (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.38–1.89; <i>P</i> = 0.708) in the ticagrelor group against the clopidogrel group. However, the risk of total bleeding was significantly higher in the ticagrelor group (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.81–5.62; <i>P</i> = 0.01). Subgroup analysis according to the confounders did not identify any significant subgroup heterogeneity. <i>Conclusion</i>. Ticagrelor did not improve the major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality when compared to clopidogrel, but significantly increased the risk of bleeding in Chinese patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency undergoing PCI.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16329,"journal":{"name":"Journal of interventional cardiology","volume":"2022 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9357815/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of interventional cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2022/6476777","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Current guidelines recommend the use of potent antiplatelet agents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, data about optimal platelet inhibition in severe renal insufficiency patients are scarce. The purpose of this study is to determine if ticagrelor is more effective than clopidogrel in patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency treated with PCI. Methods. We retrospectively enrolled patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency (eGFR ≤ 30 ml/min·1.73 m2 or dialysis) who underwent PCI at our hospital between January 2015 and March 2020. We used the adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to analyze the 1-year outcome endpoints, including the primary endpoint (the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrence of MI, or nonfatal ischemic stroke), death from any cause, and bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium, BARC criteria). Results. A total of 276 patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency who were treated with PCI with ticagrelor (n = 108) or clopidogrel (n = 168) were included in the study. After adjustment, there was no statistical difference in risk of the primary endpoint (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.46–1.33; P = 0.367) and death from any cause (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.38–1.89; P = 0.708) in the ticagrelor group against the clopidogrel group. However, the risk of total bleeding was significantly higher in the ticagrelor group (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.81–5.62; P = 0.01). Subgroup analysis according to the confounders did not identify any significant subgroup heterogeneity. Conclusion. Ticagrelor did not improve the major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality when compared to clopidogrel, but significantly increased the risk of bleeding in Chinese patients with ACS and severe renal insufficiency undergoing PCI.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
替格瑞洛与氯吡格雷在急性冠脉综合征重症肾功能不全患者行PCI治疗中的作用。
背景:目前的指南推荐在急性冠脉综合征(ACS)后接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者使用强效抗血小板药物。然而,关于严重肾功能不全患者最佳血小板抑制的数据很少。本研究的目的是确定替格瑞洛是否比氯吡格雷更有效地治疗ACS和PCI治疗的严重肾功能不全患者。方法:回顾性纳入2015年1月至2020年3月在我院行PCI治疗的ACS合并严重肾功能不全(eGFR≤30 ml/min·1.73 m2或透析)患者。我们使用调整后的Cox比例风险模型来分析1年结局终点,包括主要终点(心血管死亡、心肌梗死复发或非致死性缺血性卒中的综合)、任何原因导致的死亡和出血事件(出血学术研究联盟,BARC标准)。结果:276例ACS合并严重肾功能不全患者行替格瑞洛(n = 108)或氯吡格雷(n = 168) PCI治疗纳入研究。调整后,两组主要终点的风险无统计学差异(HR, 0.78;95% ci, 0.46-1.33;P=0.367)和任何原因死亡(HR, 0.86;95% ci, 0.38-1.89;P=0.708),替格瑞洛组与氯吡格雷组比较。然而,替格瑞洛组发生总出血的风险显著高于替格瑞洛组(HR, 3.01;95% ci, 1.81-5.62;P = 0.01)。根据混杂因素进行的亚组分析未发现任何显著的亚组异质性。结论:与氯吡格雷相比,替格瑞洛没有改善主要不良心血管事件和全因死亡率,但显著增加了中国ACS合并严重肾功能不全患者行PCI的出血风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of interventional cardiology
Journal of interventional cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Interventional Cardiology is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a forum for cardiologists determined to stay current in the diagnosis, investigation, and management of patients with cardiovascular disease and its associated complications. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies focusing on new procedures and techniques in all major subject areas in the field, including: Acute coronary syndrome Coronary disease Congenital heart diseases Myocardial infarction Peripheral arterial disease Valvular heart disease Cardiac hemodynamics and physiology Haemostasis and thrombosis
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to “The “L-Sandwich” Strategy for True Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: A Randomized Clinical Trial” Complete Revascularization Techniques for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Angiography- and Coronary Physiology-Guided PCI Predictors for Sedation Failure in Mitral Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair Procedures Single Center Experience With Impella 5.5 for Escalation and De-Escalation of Cardiogenic Shock Patients Epidemiological Trends, Etiology, and Burden Study of Heart Failure in China, 1990–2019
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1