Adriana A Rodriguez Alvarez, Shiv S Patel, Isabella F Cieri, Samir Ghandour, Mounika Boya, Sasha P Suarez, Aniket Agrawal, Ivy Lee, Lois Owolabi, Mohit Manchella, Anahita Dua
{"title":"单抗血小板疗法与双抗血小板疗法对 PAD 血管重建术后凝血/血栓形成的影响。","authors":"Adriana A Rodriguez Alvarez, Shiv S Patel, Isabella F Cieri, Samir Ghandour, Mounika Boya, Sasha P Suarez, Aniket Agrawal, Ivy Lee, Lois Owolabi, Mohit Manchella, Anahita Dua","doi":"10.1177/00368504251324332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate and compare the impact of single- versus dual-antiplatelet (SAPT vs DAPT) therapy on coagulation profiles and postoperative outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with PAD undergoing lower extremity revascularization from December 2020 to August 2023 were prospectively enrolled in this cohort study and followed for one year to record the incidence of thrombotic events (TEs). These events include arterial graft/stent occlusion or stenosis, as identified through Doppler ultrasonography or angiography. Patients were categorized by type of intervention (open vs. endovascular) and further stratified by thromboprophylaxis regimen (SAPT vs DAPT). Descriptive statistics were conducted to characterize each group. Differences in continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test, while categorical variables were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and cox proportional hazard assessed the thrombosis probability between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 157 patients were analyzed, of which 56 were open and 101 were endovascular. In the endovascular group, the majority of patients were on DAPT (61.4%), whereas in the open procedure, most individuals were on SAPT (78.6%). DAPT recipients exhibited a lower prothrombotic profile than SAPT recipients in either operative cohort (<i>p < </i>.05). However, the incidence of index TEs was similar between medication groups within each cohort over the one-year follow-up period. DAPT was associated with a decreased incidence of recurrent TEs in the open intervention group (<i>p < </i>.001), indicating its potential for reducing subsequent thrombotic complications following an index TE. Additionally, there was no significant difference in thrombosis probability between endovascular and open procedures (<i>p = </i>.73), nor between DAPT and SAPT groups across both procedure modalities (<i>p = </i>.98).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While DAPT demonstrated lower prothrombotic thromboelastography with platelet mapping profiles compared to SAPT, this did not translate into differences in index TEs across surgical modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":56061,"journal":{"name":"Science Progress","volume":"108 1","pages":"368504251324332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877524/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single versus dual antiplatelet therapy impact on coagulation/thrombosis post PAD revascularization.\",\"authors\":\"Adriana A Rodriguez Alvarez, Shiv S Patel, Isabella F Cieri, Samir Ghandour, Mounika Boya, Sasha P Suarez, Aniket Agrawal, Ivy Lee, Lois Owolabi, Mohit Manchella, Anahita Dua\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00368504251324332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate and compare the impact of single- versus dual-antiplatelet (SAPT vs DAPT) therapy on coagulation profiles and postoperative outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with PAD undergoing lower extremity revascularization from December 2020 to August 2023 were prospectively enrolled in this cohort study and followed for one year to record the incidence of thrombotic events (TEs). These events include arterial graft/stent occlusion or stenosis, as identified through Doppler ultrasonography or angiography. Patients were categorized by type of intervention (open vs. endovascular) and further stratified by thromboprophylaxis regimen (SAPT vs DAPT). Descriptive statistics were conducted to characterize each group. Differences in continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test, while categorical variables were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and cox proportional hazard assessed the thrombosis probability between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 157 patients were analyzed, of which 56 were open and 101 were endovascular. In the endovascular group, the majority of patients were on DAPT (61.4%), whereas in the open procedure, most individuals were on SAPT (78.6%). DAPT recipients exhibited a lower prothrombotic profile than SAPT recipients in either operative cohort (<i>p < </i>.05). However, the incidence of index TEs was similar between medication groups within each cohort over the one-year follow-up period. DAPT was associated with a decreased incidence of recurrent TEs in the open intervention group (<i>p < </i>.001), indicating its potential for reducing subsequent thrombotic complications following an index TE. Additionally, there was no significant difference in thrombosis probability between endovascular and open procedures (<i>p = </i>.73), nor between DAPT and SAPT groups across both procedure modalities (<i>p = </i>.98).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While DAPT demonstrated lower prothrombotic thromboelastography with platelet mapping profiles compared to SAPT, this did not translate into differences in index TEs across surgical modalities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science Progress\",\"volume\":\"108 1\",\"pages\":\"368504251324332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877524/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science Progress\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00368504251324332\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Progress","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00368504251324332","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价和比较单抗血小板与双抗血小板(SAPT vs DAPT)治疗对外周动脉疾病(PAD)患者凝血功能和术后预后的影响。方法:前瞻性纳入2020年12月至2023年8月接受下肢血运重建术的PAD患者,随访1年,记录血栓形成事件(TEs)的发生率。这些事件包括通过多普勒超声或血管造影发现的动脉移植物/支架闭塞或狭窄。根据干预类型(开放vs血管内)对患者进行分类,并根据血栓预防方案(SAPT vs DAPT)进一步分层。对每组进行描述性统计。连续变量间的差异采用Student's t检验,分类变量间的差异采用Fisher精确检验。Kaplan-Meier生存曲线和cox比例风险评估组间血栓形成概率。结果:共分析157例患者,其中切开56例,血管内101例。在血管内组,大多数患者使用DAPT(61.4%),而在开放手术中,大多数患者使用SAPT(78.6%)。在两个手术队列中,DAPT受体比SAPT受体表现出更低的血栓形成前特征(p .05)。然而,在一年的随访期间,每个队列中用药组之间的指数TEs发生率相似。在开放干预组中,DAPT与TE复发发生率降低相关(p .001),表明它有可能减少指数TE后的后续血栓性并发症。此外,血管内手术和开放手术的血栓发生率无显著差异(p = 0.73),两种手术方式的DAPT组和SAPT组的血栓发生率也无显著差异(p = 0.98)。结论:虽然与SAPT相比,DAPT显示出血小板定位谱的血栓前弹性图较低,但这并没有转化为不同手术方式下TEs指数的差异。
Single versus dual antiplatelet therapy impact on coagulation/thrombosis post PAD revascularization.
Objective: To evaluate and compare the impact of single- versus dual-antiplatelet (SAPT vs DAPT) therapy on coagulation profiles and postoperative outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).
Methods: Patients with PAD undergoing lower extremity revascularization from December 2020 to August 2023 were prospectively enrolled in this cohort study and followed for one year to record the incidence of thrombotic events (TEs). These events include arterial graft/stent occlusion or stenosis, as identified through Doppler ultrasonography or angiography. Patients were categorized by type of intervention (open vs. endovascular) and further stratified by thromboprophylaxis regimen (SAPT vs DAPT). Descriptive statistics were conducted to characterize each group. Differences in continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test, while categorical variables were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and cox proportional hazard assessed the thrombosis probability between groups.
Results: A total of 157 patients were analyzed, of which 56 were open and 101 were endovascular. In the endovascular group, the majority of patients were on DAPT (61.4%), whereas in the open procedure, most individuals were on SAPT (78.6%). DAPT recipients exhibited a lower prothrombotic profile than SAPT recipients in either operative cohort (p < .05). However, the incidence of index TEs was similar between medication groups within each cohort over the one-year follow-up period. DAPT was associated with a decreased incidence of recurrent TEs in the open intervention group (p < .001), indicating its potential for reducing subsequent thrombotic complications following an index TE. Additionally, there was no significant difference in thrombosis probability between endovascular and open procedures (p = .73), nor between DAPT and SAPT groups across both procedure modalities (p = .98).
Conclusion: While DAPT demonstrated lower prothrombotic thromboelastography with platelet mapping profiles compared to SAPT, this did not translate into differences in index TEs across surgical modalities.
期刊介绍:
Science Progress has for over 100 years been a highly regarded review publication in science, technology and medicine. Its objective is to excite the readers'' interest in areas with which they may not be fully familiar but which could facilitate their interest, or even activity, in a cognate field.