Search

Acute coronary syndromes are common situations in medical practice, with high morbidity and mortality. Consequent to its relevance, its clinical management has always been subject of discussion and controversy. Since the past decade, the dual antiplatelet regimen has been the main therapeutic option used in its passivation, whereas percutaneous interventions have become the most common therapeutic option. Clopidogrel, the drug initially used in combination with aspirin, is effective and safe; however, it has disadvantages that led to the development of a new generation of more efficient antiplatelet drugs, such as prasugrel and ticagrelor. In large comparative clinical trials, these two drugs proved superior to clopidogrel in reducing major combined cardiac events. Hence the main guidelines currently support the two new agents, which are considered first-line drugs. Due to the clear differences between the protocols of clinical trials corroborating their inclusion in clinical practice, it is not possible to make direct comparison without the risk of generating hasty impressions. More recently, a large prospective, randomized clinical trial provided an appropriate head-to-head comparison between prasugrel and ticagrelor in cases of acute coronary disease, in a population submitted to invasive treatment. The study demonstrated a significant advantage of prasugrel. In this review, we discuss the primary details of these more contemporary drugs and the most relevant clinical trials related to them, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of each agent. At the end, we state our view on their current prescription.

The ideal antithrombotic management in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention or in acute coronary syndrome has not been definitively established yet. Dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and P2Y12 receptor inhibitors) reduces stent thrombosis and subsequent ischemic events. In turn, the presence of atrial fibrillation requires oral anticoagulation to prevent stroke and other thromboembolic complications. However, the combination of these two treatments, known as triple therapy, increases the risk of severe bleeding, with a negative prognostic impact. The use of direct anticoagulants, which reduce bleeding rates compared to warfarin, together with the maintenance of only one antiplatelet agent (P2Y12 inhibitors), known as dual therapy, may be a safer alternative in these patients. In this article, we reviewed several randomized studies comparing triple versus dual therapy, as well as meta-analyses with such studies, and the approaches suggested by the most recent guidelines, discussing the advantages and disadvantages of these treatments, in terms of safety and efficacy in this important and growing subgroup of patients.

Background The angiographic characteristics associated with saphenous vein graft degeneration and the high-risk profile of these patients increase the probability of adverse outcomes during and after percutaneous coronary intervention. This study set out to analyze the clinical and angiographic profile of patients, procedural characteristics, and hospital outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention performed in saphenous vein grafts, and to investigate predictors of in-hospital mortality in this group. Methods A retrospective, observational study based on records kept by Central Nacional de [...]