Search

Therapeutic anticoagulation showed inconsistent results in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and selection of the best patients to use this strategy still a challenge balancing the risk of thrombotic and hemorrhagic outcomes. The present post-hoc analysis of the ACTION trial evaluated the variables independently associated with both bleeding events (major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding) and the composite outcomes thrombotic events (venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, or major adverse limb events). Variables were assessed one by one with independent logistic regressions and final models were chosen based on Akaike information criteria. The model for bleeding events showed an area under the curve of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 0.73), while the model for thrombotic events had an area under the curve of 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79). Non-invasive respiratory support was associated with thrombotic but not bleeding events, while invasive ventilation was associated with both outcomes (Odds Ratio of 7.03 [95 CI% 1.95 to 25.18] for thrombotic and 3.14 [95% CI 1.11 to 8.84] for bleeding events). Beyond respiratory support, creatinine level (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.01 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02 for every 1.0 mg/dL) and history of coronary disease (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.32 to 10.29) were also independently associated to the risk of thrombotic events. Non-invasive respiratory support, history of coronary disease, and creatinine level may help to identify hospitalized COVID-19 patients at higher risk of thrombotic complications. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04394377. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent randomized controlled trials did not show benefit of early/immediate coronary angiography (CAG) over a delayed/selective strategy in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and no ST-segment elevation. However, whether selected subgroups, specifically those with a high pretest probability of coronary artery disease may benefit from early CAG remains unclear. Methods: We included all randomized controlled trials that compared a strategy of early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG in OHCA patients and no ST elevation and had a follow-up of at least 30 days. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause death. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated and pooled across trials. Interaction testing was used to assess for heterogeneity of treatment effects. Results: In total, 1512 patients (67 years, 26% female, 23% prior myocardial infarction) were included from 5 randomized controlled trials. Early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG was not associated with a statistically significant difference in odds of death (OR 1.12, 95%-CI 0.91–1.38), with similar findings for the composite outcome of all-cause death or neurological deficit (OR 1.10, 95%-CI 0.89–1.36). There was no effect modification for death by age, presence of a shockable initial cardiac rhythm, history of coronary artery disease, presence of an ischemic event as the presumed cause of arrest, or time to return of spontaneous circulation (all P-interaction > 0.10). However, early/immediate CAG tended to be associated with higher odds of death in women (OR 1.52, 95%-CI 1.00–2.31, P = 0.050) than in men (OR 1.04, 95%-CI 0.82–1.33, P = 0.74; P-interaction 0.097). Conclusion: In OHCA patients without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG did not reduce all-cause mortality across major subgroups. However, women tended to have higher odds of death with early CAG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Clopidogrel has been demonstrated to be effective in improving coronary microcirculation (CM) among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with fibrinolytics. Ticagrelor is a more potent adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor blocker proven to be superior to clopidogrel among patients with acute coronary syndromes. The present study aimed to compare the effects of ticagrelor and clopidogrel on CM in patients with STEMI treated with fibrinolytics.Methods: The present study prospectively included 48 patients participating in the TREAT trial, which randomly assigned patients with STEMI undergoing fibrinolysis to ticagrelor versus clopidogrel. The primary endpoint of this study was the evaluation of the CM using the global myocardial perfusion score index (global MPSI) obtained by myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE). Platelet aggregation to ADP was evaluated by Multiplate® and expressed as area under the curve (AUC).Results: The global MPSI demonstrated no differences between the groups [mean 1.4 (1.2-1.5) in the ticagrelor group and 1.2 (1.2-1.5) in the clopidogrel group (p = 0.41)]. Platelet aggregability was lower in the ticagrelor group (18.1 ± 9.7 AUC), compared to the clopidogrel group (26.1 ± 12.5 AUC, p = 0.01).Conclusion: We found no improvement in coronary microcirculation with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel among patients with STEMI treated with fibrinolytics, despite the fact that platelet aggregation to ADP was lower with ticagrelor.Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03104062. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introdution: COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the contribution of platelet reactivity (PR) to the aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate PR in stable patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized with respiratory symptoms (mainly dyspnoea and dry cough), in comparison with a control group comprised of non-hospitalized healthy controls. Methods: Observational, case control study that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 (COVID-19 group, n = 60) and healthy individuals matched by age and sex (control group, n = 60). Multiplate electrode aggregometry (MEA) tests were used to assess PR with adenosine diphosphate (MEA-ADP, low PR defined as < 53 AUC), arachidonic acid (MEA-ASPI, low PR < 86 AUC) and thrombin receptor-activating peptide 6 (MEA-TRAP, low PR < 97 AUC) in both groups. Results: The rates of low PR with MEA-ADP were 27.5% in the COVID-19 group and 21.7% in the control group (OR = 1.60, p = 0.20); with MEA-ASPI, the rates were, respectively, 37.5% and 22.5% (OR = 3.67, p < 0.001); and with MEA-TRAP, the incidences were 48.5% and 18.8%, respectively (OR = 9.58, p < 0.001). Levels of d-dimer, fibrinogen, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) were higher in the COVID-19 group in comparison with the control group (all p < 0.05). Thromboelastometry was utilized in a subgroup of patients and showed a hypercoagulable state in the COVID-19 group. Conclusion: Patients hospitalized with non-severe COVID-19 had lower PR compared to healthy controls, despite having higher levels of d-dimer, fibrinogen, and PAI-1, and hypercoagulability by thromboelastometry. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04447131. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study addressing the relationship between Lp(a) and platelet reactivity in primary and secondary prevention. Methods: Lp(a) was evaluated in 396 individuals with (82.3%) and without (17.7%) obstructive CAD. The population was divided into two groups according to Lp(a) concentrations with a cutoff value of 50 mg/dL. The primary objective was to evaluate the association between Lp(a) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet reactivity using the VerifyNow™ P2Y12 assay. Platelet reactivity was also induced by arachidonic acid and collagen–epinephrine (C-EPI) and assessed by Multiplate™, platelet function analyzer™ 100 (PFA-100), and light transmission aggregometry (LTA) assays. Secondary objectives included the assessment of the primary endpoint in individuals with or without CAD. Results: Overall, 294 (74.2%) individuals had Lp(a) < 50 mg/dL [median (IQR) 13.2 (5.8–27.9) mg/dL] and 102 (25.8%) had Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL [82.5 (67.6–114.5) mg/dL], P < 0.001. Univariate analysis in the entire population revealed no differences in ADP-induced platelet reactivity between individuals with Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL (249.4 ± 43.8 PRU) versus Lp(a) < 50 mg/dL (243.1 ± 52.2 PRU), P = 0.277. Similar findings were present in individuals with (P = 0.228) and without (P = 0.669) CAD, and regardless of the agonist used or method of analysis (all P > 0.05). Finally, multivariable analysis did not show a significant association between ADP-induced platelet reactivity and Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL [adjusted OR = 1.00 [(95% CI 0.99–1.01), P = 0.590]. Conclusion: In individuals with or without CAD, Lp(a) ≥ 50 mg/dL was not associated with higher platelet reactivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For more than half a century, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) has been recognized as a major risk factor for incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The discovery of proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) in 2003, which prevents LDL-C receptor recycling, identified a new target for drug intervention. Recently, two large-scale randomized clinical outcomes trials involving fully human anti-PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies tested the hypothesis that targeting this pathway would reduce cardiovascular events. Both the FOURIER (Further cardiovascular OUtcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in subjects with Elevated Risk) and ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trials met their primary efficacy endpoints, confirming findings reported earlier that major adverse cardiovascular events can be reduced by a further lowering of LDL-C beyond that achieved with statin therapy. In both trials, there were incremental reductions in LDL-C of > 50% from baseline, with no major safety concerns, over the trials' median follow-up time (2.2 and 2.8 years, respectively). While there were differences in design, lipid management and overall results, key messages from both studies were similar. However, post-publication, additional questions have arisen, especially regarding drug effects over the long-term, including a potential mortality benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The interaction between anticoagulants and platelet function is complex. Previous publications showed mixed results regarding the role of heparins in platelet aggregation. On the other hand, the direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) dabigatran might enhance the risk of myocardial infarction in patients with atrial fibrillation, which could be related to increased platelet aggregability.Methods: This was a prospective, interventional study of patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) taking low-dose aspirin. The objective of the current study was to compare the effects of dabigatran versus enoxaparin on platelet aggregability. Subjects initially were on orally administered dabigatran for 5 days followed by subcutaneously administered enoxaparin after a 30-day washout period. Platelet function was assessed at baseline and after each intervention by multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA-ASPI) (primary endpoint), serum thromboxane B2 (TXB2), VerifyNow Aspirin™, and coagulation tests (secondary endpoints).Results: Compared to baseline MEA-ASPI values, dabigatran increased platelet aggregation while enoxaparin decreased platelet aggregation (+ 5 U ± 24.1 vs - 6 U ± 22.2, respectively, p = 0.012). The TXB2 assay showed the same pattern (+ 2 pg/ml for dabigatran vs - 13 pg/ml for enoxaparin, p = 0.011). None of the additional tests showed significant differences between the groups. Individually, compared to baseline TXB2 results, enoxaparin significantly decreased platelet activation [33 (16.5-95) pg/mL vs 20 (10-52) pg/mL, respectively, p = 0.026], but no significant differences were observed with dabigatran.Conclusions: DTI and anti-Xa drugs exert opposite effects on platelet function. A significant decrease in platelet activation through COX1 (also known as prostaglandin G/H synthase 1) was observed with enoxaparin, but no significant differences in platelet function were observed with dabigatran.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02389582. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent reports have suggested that aspirin effect might be influenced by bodyweight, with decreased efficacy in heavier individuals. We investigated the influence of bodyweight on aspirin pharmacodynamics in two independent datasets of patients taking non-enteric coated aspirin 100 mg QD for coronary artery disease (CAD). In the first dataset, 368 patients had their platelet aggregation assessed using VerifyNow Aspirin and measured in Aspirin Reaction Units (ARU). In the second dataset, 70 patients had serum thromboxane B2 (TXB2) dosage assessed by an ELISA assay and measured in pg/mL. Platelet aggregation was independently associated with bodyweight, with 8.41 (95% CI 1.86–14.97; adjusted p-value = 0.012) increase in ARU for every 10 kg. Furthermore, the rate of non-response to aspirin (defined as ARU ≥ 550) was significantly associated with increased bodyweight (adjusted p-value = 0.007), with OR = 1.23 (95% CI 1.06–1.42) for every 10 kg. Similar results were found considering body mass index (in kg/m2), with 15.5 (95% CI 5.0 to 25.9; adjusted p-value = 0.004) increase in ARU for every 10 kg and non-response OR = 1.43 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.81, adjusted p-value = 0.003) for every 5 kg/m2. Moreover, serum TXB2 was higher in patients weighting more than 70 kg (222.6 ± 62.9 versus 194.9 ± 61.9 pg/mL; adjusted p-value = 0.018). In two different datasets of patients with CAD on non-enteric coated aspirin 100 mg QD, increased bodyweight was independently associated with impaired response to aspirin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of beta-blockers in patients with acute coronary syndromes is mainly derived from studies including patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Little is known about the use of beta-blockers and associated long-term clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS).Methods: We analyzed short- and long-term clinical outcomes of 2921 patients with NSTEACS using or not oral beta-blockers in the first 24 h of the acute coronary syndromes (ACS) presentation. The association between beta-blocker use and mortality was assessed using a propensity score adjusted analysis (N = 1378).Results: Patients starting oral beta-blockers in the first 24 h of hospitalization, compared with patients who did not, had lower rates of in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.74, P = 0.002) and higher mean survival times in the long-term follow-up (11.86±0.4 years vs. 9.92±0.39 years, P < 0.001).Conclusion: The use of beta-blockers in the first 24 h of patients presenting with NSTEACS was associated with better in-hospital and long-term mortality outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are often prescribed to patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, this class of medication, especially omeprazole, has been associated with a reduction in clopidogrel efficacy, leading many clinicians to substitute omeprazole with ranitidine. Objectives: Our objective was to compare the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel before and after the addition of omeprazole or ranitidine. Methods: We measured platelet aggregability at baseline and after 1 week of clopidogrel 75 mg daily. Subjects were then randomized in a double-blinded, double-dummy fashion to omeprazole 20 mg twice daily (bid) or ranitidine 150 mg bid. We repeated aggregability tests after 1 additional week, using VerifyNow P2Y12™ (Accumetrics; San Diego, CA, USA), depicting aggregability as percent inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA). Results: We enrolled 41 patients in the omeprazole group and 44 in the ranitidine group. IPA was significantly decreased after the addition of omeprazole to clopidogrel (from 26.3 ± 32.9 to 17.4 ± 33.1 %; p = 0.025), with no statistical significant changes observed in the ranitidine group (from 32.6 ± 28.9 to 30.1 ± 31.3 %; p = 0.310). The comparison of IPA in both groups at the end of the follow-up showed a trend toward significance ( p = 0.07, 95 % confidence interval [CI] −1.19 to 26.59); after excluding homozygous patients for 2C19*2 genotype, the comparison of IPA between the groups reached statistical significance (32.7 ± 30.8 vs. 17.7 ± 33.4 %, respectively, for ranitidine and omeprazole groups; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Unlike omeprazole, ranitidine did not influence platelet aggregability response to clopidogrel. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01896557. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]