Search

The current guidelines for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) discourage the use of anticoagulation after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without specific indications, although the recommendation is not well supported by evidence. In this post hoc analysis of the ShorT and OPtimal Duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy-3 (STOPDAPT-3) trial, 30-day outcomes were compared between the 2 groups with and without post-PCI heparin administration among patients with ACS who did not receive mechanical support devices. The co-primary end points were the bleeding end point, defined as the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding, and the cardiovascular end point, defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke. Among 4,088 patients with ACS, 2,339 patients (57.2%) received post-PCI heparin. The proportion of patients receiving post-PCI heparin was higher among those with ST-elevation myocardial infarction compared with others (72.3% and 38.8%, p <0.001), and among patients with intraprocedural adverse angiographic findings compared with those without (67.6% and 47.5%, p <0.001). Post-PCI heparin compared with no post-PCI heparin was associated with a significantly increased risk of the bleeding end point (4.75% and 2.52%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.46, p = 0.007) and a numerically increased risk of the cardiovascular end point (3.16% and 1.72%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 2.46, p = 0.06). Higher hourly dose or total doses of heparin were also associated with higher incidence of both bleeding and cardiovascular events within 30 days. In conclusion, post-PCI anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin was frequently implemented in patients with ACS. Post-PCI heparin use was associated with harm in terms of increased bleeding without the benefit of reducing cardiovascular events. Trial identifier: STOPDAPT-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04609111., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Watanabe reports lecturer's fees from Abbott Medical Japan during the conduct of the study and from Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Amgen, and Astellas outside the submitted work. Dr. Natsuaki reports honoraria from Abbott Medical Japan, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Terumo, Japan Lifeline, Asahi Intecc, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Otsuka, Amgen, Sanofi, Takeda, and Bayer. Dr. Morimoto reports lecturer's fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Japan Lifeline, Pfizer (New York, New York, United States), Tsumura, and UCB; manuscript fee from Pfizer; and advisory board membership for GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Teijin. Dr. Obayashi reports lecturer's fee from Abbott Medical Japan. Dr. Suwa reports personal fees from Abbott Medical Japan and Daiichi Sankyo outside the submitted work. Dr. Ogita reports personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Abbott Medical Japan, and Japan Lifeline outside the submitted work. Dr. Suzuki reports grants from Abbott Medical Japan during the conduct of the study. Dr. Morishima reports honoraria from Abbott Medical Japan and Daiichi Sankyo. Dr. Kimura reports grants from Abbott Medical Japan and Boston Scientific and being an advisory board member for Abbott Medical Japan and Terumo Japan. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: High bleeding risk (HBR) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) subtypes are critical in determining bleeding and cardiovascular event risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods and Results: In 4476 ACS patients enrolled in the STOPDAPT-3, where the no-aspirin and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) strategies after PCI were randomly compared, the pre-specified subgroup analyses were conducted based on HBR/non-HBR and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)/non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). The co-primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5, and the co-primary cardiovascular endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischaemic stroke at 1 month. Irrespective of the subgroups, the effect of no-aspirin compared with DAPT was not significant for the bleeding endpoint (HBR [N = 1803]: 7.27 and 7.91%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-1.28; non-HBR [N = 2673]: 3.40 and 3.65%, HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62-1.39; Pinteraction = 0.94; STEMI [N = 2553]: 6.58 and 6.56%, HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.74-1.35; NSTE-ACS [N = 1923]: 2.94 and 3.64%, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.32; Pinteraction = 0.45), and for the cardiovascular endpoint (HBR: 7.87 and 5.75%, HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.97-1.99; non-HBR: 2.56 and 2.67%, HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.60-1.53; Pinteraction = 0.22; STEMI: 6.07 and 5.46%, HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.81-1.54; NSTE-ACS: 3.03 and 1.71%, HR 1.78, 95% CI 0.97-3.27; Pinteraction = 0.18)., Conclusion: In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, the no-aspirin strategy compared with the DAPT strategy failed to reduce major bleeding events irrespective of HBR and ACS subtypes. The numerical excess risk of the no-aspirin strategy relative to the DAPT strategy for cardiovascular events was observed in patients with HBR and in patients with NSTE-ACS., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The effects of aspirin-free strategy on bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with oral anticoagulation (OAC) have not been fully elucidated., Methods and Results: We conducted the prespecified subgroup analysis based on the use of OAC, including vitamin K antagonist and direct oral anticoagulants, within 7 days before percutaneous coronary intervention in the STOPDAPT-3 (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy-3) trial, which randomly compared prasugrel monotherapy (2984 patients) to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with prasugrel and aspirin (2982 patients) in patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. The coprimary end points were major bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 or 5) and cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke) at 1 month. Among 5966 study patients, there were 530 patients (8.9%) with OAC (no aspirin: N=248, and DAPT: N=282) and 5436 patients (91.1%) without OAC (no aspirin: N=2736, and DAPT: N=2700). Regardless of the use of OAC, the effects of no aspirin compared with DAPT were not significant for the bleeding end point (OAC: 4.45% and 4.27%, hazard ratio [HR], 1.04 [95% CI, 0.46-2.35]; no-OAC: 4.47% and 4.75%, HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.73-1.20]; P for interaction=0.82), and for the cardiovascular end point (OAC: 4.84% and 3.20%, HR, 1.53 [95% CI, 0.64-3.62]; no-OAC: 4.06% and 3.74%, HR, 1.09 [95% CI 0.83-1.42]; P for interaction =0.46)., Conclusions: The no-aspirin strategy compared with the DAPT strategy failed to reduce major bleeding events irrespective of the use of OAC. There was a numerical excess risk of the no-aspirin strategy relative to the DAPT strategy for cardiovascular events in patients with OAC.

Background: Bleeding rates on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) within 1 month after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain high in clinical practice, particularly in patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. Aspirin-free strategy might result in lower bleeding early after PCI without increasing cardiovascular events, but its efficacy and safety have not yet been proven in randomized trials., Methods: We randomly assigned 6002 patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk just before PCI either to prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) monotherapy or to DAPT with aspirin (81-100 mg/day) and prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) after loading of 20 mg of prasugrel in both groups. The coprimary end points were major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5) for superiority and cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke) for noninferiority with a relative 50% margin., Results: The full analysis set population consisted of 5966 patients (no-aspirin group, 2984 patients; DAPT group, 2982 patients; age, 71.6±11.7 years; men, 76.6%; acute coronary syndrome, 75.0%). Within 7 days before randomization, aspirin alone, aspirin with P2Y12 inhibitor, oral anticoagulants, and intravenous heparin infusion were given in 21.3%, 6.4%, 8.9%, and 24.5%, respectively. Adherence to the protocol-specified antiplatelet therapy was 88% in both groups at 1 month. At 1 month, the no-aspirin group was not superior to the DAPT group for the coprimary bleeding end point (4.47% and 4.71%; hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.75-1.20]; P superiority =0.66). The no-aspirin group was noninferior to the DAPT group for the coprimary cardiovascular end point (4.12% and 3.69%; hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.87-1.45]; P non inferiority =0.01). There was no difference in net adverse clinical outcomes and each component of coprimary cardiovascular end point. There was an excess of any unplanned coronary revascularization (1.05% and 0.57%; hazard ratio, 1.83 [95%CI, 1.01-3.30]) and subacute definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.58% and 0.17%; hazard ratio, 3.40 [95% CI, 1.26-9.23]) in the no-aspirin group compared with the DAPT group., Conclusions: The aspirin-free strategy using low-dose prasugrel compared with the DAPT strategy failed to attest superiority for major bleeding within 1 month after PCI but was noninferior for cardiovascular events within 1 month after PCI. However, the aspirin-free strategy was associated with a signal suggesting an excess of coronary events., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04609111., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Natsuaki reports honoraria from Abbott Medical Japan, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Terumo, Japan Lifeline, Asahi Intecc, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Otsuka, Amgen, Sanofi, Takeda and Bayer. Dr Watanabe reports personal fees from Abbott Medical Japan during the conduct of the study, and personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Kowa, Abiomed, Bayer, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Otsuka, as well, outside the submitted work. Dr Morimoto reports lecturer’s fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Japan Lifeline, Kowa, Pfizer and Tsumura; manuscript fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; advisory board for Novartis and Teijin. Dr Suwa reports personal fees from Abbott Medical Japan and Daiichi Sankyo outside the submitted work. Dr Ogita reports personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Abbott Medical Japan, and Japan Lifeline outside the submitted work. Dr Suzuki reports grants from Abbott Medical Japan during the conduct of the study. Dr Morishima reports honoraria from Abbott Medical Japan and Daiichi Sankyo. Dr Kimura reports grants from Abbott Medical Japan and Boston Scientific and being an advisory board member of Abbott Medical Japan and Terumo Japan. The remaining authors reported no conflicts.

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment to prevent thrombotic or ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and those treated medically for an acute coronary syndrome. The use of antiplatelet therapy comes at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding complications. Defining the optimal intensity of platelet inhibition according to the clinical presentation of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and individual patient factors is a clinical challenge. Modulation of antiplatelet therapy is a medical action that is frequently performed to balance the risk of thrombotic or ischemic events and the risk of bleeding. This aim may be achieved by reducing (ie, de-escalation) or increasing (ie, escalation) the intensity of platelet inhibition by changing the type, dose, or number of antiplatelet drugs. Because de-escalation or escalation can be achieved in different ways, with a number of emerging approaches, confusion arises with terminologies that are often used interchangeably. To address this issue, this Academic Research Consortium collaboration provides an overview and definitions of different strategies of antiplatelet therapy modulation for patients with coronary artery disease, including but not limited to those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and consensus statements on standardized definitions., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Capodanno reports speaker or consulting fees from Amgen, Arena, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Terumo; and institutional fees from Medtronic. Dr Mehran reports institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, Amgen, AM-Pharma, Arena, AstraZeneca, Atricure, Bayer, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, Daiichi Sankyo, Element Science, Faraday, Filterlex Medical, Humacyte, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Mediasphere, Medtelligence, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Penumbra, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi-Cardia, PLx Pharma, Protembis, RenalPro, RM Global, Shockwave, Vivasure, and Zoll; personal fees from Cine-Med Research, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Vectura, and WebMD; equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, Stel, and ControlRad (spouse); and roles with the American Medical Association (Scientific Advisory Board, JAMA Cardiology Associate editor), American College of Cardiology (board of trustees member, member clinical trials research program), and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (Women in Innovations committee member; faculty Cardiac Research Foundation; no fee). Dr Baber discloses honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular. Dr Bhatt discloses the following relationships: advisory board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; board of directors: Angiowave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; chair: inaugural chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; consultant: Broadview Ventures and Hims; data monitoring committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for PORTICO [Portico Re-sheathable Transcatheter Aortic Valve System US IDE Trial], funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (chair, PEITHO [Pulmonary Embolism Thrombolysis Study]), Cleveland Clinic (including for ExCEED [Centera THV System in Intermediate Risk Patients Who Have Symptomatic, Severe, Calcific, Aortic Stenosis], funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (chair, PERFORMANCE 2 [Protection Against Emboli During Carotid Artery Stenting Using the Neuroguard IEP System]), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for ENVISAGE [Edoxaban Compared to Standard Care After Heart Valve Replacement Using a Catheter in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation], funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for ABILITY-DM [Randomized Comparison of Abluminus DES+ Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Coronary Artery Disease Patients with Diabetes Mellitus], funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the National Institutes of Health–funded MINT [Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion]); honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; chair, American College of Cardiology Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI [Evaluation of Dual Therapy With Dabigatran vs Triple Therapy With Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation That Undergo a PCI With Stenting] clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II [Study to Investigate CSL112 in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome] executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor-in-Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for PRONOUNCE [A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease], funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (editor-in-chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (guest editor; associate editor), K2P (co-chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (course director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS [Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies] operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and US national coleader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (chief medical editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (secretary/treasurer), WebMD (continuing medical education steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); other: Clinical Cardiology (deputy editor), National Cardiovascular Data Registry–ACTION Registry Steering Committee (chair), and VA CART (Cardiovascular Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking) Research and Publications Committee (chair); patent: sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, assigned to Lexicon; neither the author nor Brigham and Women’s Hospital receives any income from this patent); research funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; royalties: Elsevier (editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); site coinvestigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; trustee: American College of Cardiology; and unfunded research: FlowCo and Takeda. Dr Capranzano reports speaker fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, and Bayer. Dr Collet reports grants for the institution, honoraria, or research fees from BMS Pfizer, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and AstraZeneca. Dr Cuisset reports consulting and lecture fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards, Europa Organisation, Medtronic, Terumo, and Sanofi, and shares from CERC, a health care company. Dr L. De Luca has received consulting fees or honoraria from Amgen, Aspen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Pfizer/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Servier, and The Medicines Company, outside the present work. Dr Farb has received payment as an individual for consulting fee or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi and institutional payments for grants from PLx Pharma and The Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Gibson reports grant support paid to the institution and consulting fees from Johnson & Johnson, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor, Daiichi Sankyo, and Merck. Dr Hahn reports an institutional research grant from the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Korea, and from Abbott Vascular, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Donga-ST, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, and Medtronic Inc. Dr James repots grants to the institution from Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, and AstraZeneca. Dr Lemos reports institutional research funding, unpaid advisory board membership, unpaid membership of the steering/executive/data safety and monitoring group of trials, and unpaid interventional proctorship by Abbott, Corindus, Scitech, Boston Scientific, and Flouit but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers; being part of Argonauts, an innovation facilitator; and partial support by a grant from The National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Brazil (grant 306677/2019-9). Dr Lopes reports research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, and Pfizer and consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Merck, Pfizer, and Portola. Dr Morice reports being chief executive officer and a shareholder of CERC and a minor shareholder of Electroducer. Dr O’Donoghue reports grants through the hospital from Amgen, Novartis, Janssen, Merck, and AstraZeneca, and honoraria from Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Janssen. Dr Serruys reports consultancy fees from SMT, Philips, Novartis, Merillife, and Xeltis. Dr Smits reports institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular and SMT and speaker or consulting honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Microport, and Terumo. Dr Steg reports research grants from Amarin, Bayer, Sanofi, and Servier; he is a speaker or consultant for Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Janssen, Kowa, Idorsia, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier; he is senior associate editor of Circulation. Dr Storey reports institutional research grants/support and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics, and Thromboserin and personal fees from Alnylam, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Hengrui, Idorsia, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, PhaseBio, and Sanofi Aventis. Dr Valgimigli reports grants and personal fees from Terumo and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Universität Basel, Dept Klinische Forschung, Vifor, Bristol Myers Squib SA, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medscape, Medtronic, Vesalio, Novartis, Chiesi, ECRI, and PhaseBio. Dr Vranckx received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer AG, CSL Behring, Novartis, and Pfizer-Bristol Meyers Squibb alliance. Dr Windecker reports research, travel, or educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, Corflow Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, InfraRedx, Janssen-Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Miracor Medical, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Organon, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Polares, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Sinomed, Terumo, Vifor, and V-Wave; serves as an advisory board member or member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, Janssen, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Recardio, SINOMED, Terumo, V-Wave, and Xeltis, with payments to the institution but no personal payments; and is a member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without effect on his personal remuneration. Dr Yeh reports research grants or consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and consulting fees from Cathworks, Elixir Medical, Shockwave, and Zoll. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Vectura, outside the present work; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Background: The REAL-CAD trial, reported in 2017, demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiovascular events with high-intensity statins in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. However, data are scarce on the use of high-intensity statins in Japanese patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods and results: In STOPDAPT-2 ACS, which exclusively enrolled ACS patients between March 2018 and June 2020, 1,321 (44.2%) patients received high-intensity statins at discharge, whereas of the remaining 1,667 patients, 96.0% were treated with low-dose statins. High-intensity statins were defined as the maximum approved doses of strong statins in Japan. The incidence of the cardiovascular composite endpoint (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, stroke) was significantly lower in patients with than without high-intensity statins (1.44% vs. 2.69% [log-rank P=0.025]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.94, P=0.03) and the effect was evident beyond 60 days after the index percutaneous coronary intervention (log-rank P=0.01; aHR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17-0.86, P=0.02). As for the bleeding endpoint, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (0.99% vs. 0.73% [log-rank P=0.43]; aHR 0.96, 95% CI 0.35-2.60, P=0.93)., Conclusions: The prevalence of high-intensity statins has increased substantially in Japan. The use of the higher doses of statins in ACS patients recommended in the guidelines was associated with a significantly lower risk of the primary cardiovascular composite endpoint compared with lower-dose statins.

Importance: Clopidogrel monotherapy after short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not yet been fully investigated in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Objective: To test the hypothesis of noninferiority of 1 to 2 months of DAPT compared with 12 months of DAPT for a composite end point of cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients with ACS., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial enrolled 4169 patients with ACS who underwent successful PCI using cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents at 96 centers in Japan from December 2015 through June 2020. These data were analyzed from June to July 2021., Interventions: Patients were randomized either to 1 to 2 months of DAPT followed by clopidogrel monotherapy (n = 2078) or to 12 months of DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel (n = 2091)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction [MI], any stroke, or definite stent thrombosis) or bleeding (Thrombolysis in MI major or minor bleeding) events at 12 months, with a noninferiority margin of 50% on the hazard ratio (HR) scale. The major secondary end points were cardiovascular and bleeding components of the primary end point., Results: Among 4169 randomized patients, 33 withdrew consent. Of the 4136 included patients, the mean (SD) age was 66.8 (11.9) years, and 856 (21%) were women, 2324 (56%) had ST-segment elevation MI, and 826 (20%) had non-ST-segment elevation MI. A total of 4107 patients (99.3%) completed the 1-year follow-up in June 2021. One to 2 months of DAPT was not noninferior to 12 months of DAPT for the primary end point, which occurred in 65 of 2058 patients (3.2%) in the 1- to 2-month DAPT group and in 58 of 2057 patients (2.8%) in the 12-month DAPT group (absolute difference, 0.37% [95% CI, -0.68% to 1.42%]; HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.80-1.62]; P for noninferiority = .06). The major secondary cardiovascular end point occurred in 56 patients (2.8%) in the 1- to 2-month DAPT group and in 38 patients (1.9%) in the 12-month DAPT group (absolute difference, 0.90% [95% CI, -0.02% to 1.82%]; HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 0.99-2.26]). The major secondary bleeding end point occurred in 11 patients (0.5%) in the 1- to 2-month DAPT group and 24 patients (1.2%) in the 12-month DAPT group (absolute difference, -0.63% [95% CI, -1.20% to -0.06%]; HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.23-0.94])., Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with ACS with successful PCI, clopidogrel monotherapy after 1 to 2 months of DAPT failed to attest noninferiority to standard 12 months of DAPT for the net clinical benefit with a numerical increase in cardiovascular events despite reduction in bleeding events. The directionally different efficacy and safety outcomes indicate the need for further clinical trials., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02619760 and NCT03462498.

Background: Data evaluating the effects of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) relative to stable coronary artery disease (CAD) on bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are scarce.Methods and Results:From the CREDO-Kyoto Registry Cohort-3, 13,258 patients undergoing first PCI (5,521 ACS; 7,737 stable CAD) were identified. Patients were further stratified according to ACS presentation and Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk (HBR): ACS/HBR: n=2,502; ACS/no-HBR: n=3,019; stable CAD/HBR: n=3,905; and stable CAD/no-HBR: n=3,832. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3/5 bleeding, whereas the primary ischemic endpoint was myocardial infarction (MI)/ischemic stroke. Compared with stable CAD, ACS was associated with a significantly higher adjusted risk for bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.68-2.03; P<0.0001), with a markedly higher risk within 30 days (HR 4.24; 95% CI 3.56-5.06; P<0.0001). Compared with the stable CAD/no-HBR group, the ACS/HBR, no-ACS/HBR, and ACS/no-HBR groups were associated with significantly higher adjusted risks for bleeding, with HRs of 3.05 (95% CI 2.64-3.54; P<0.0001), 1.89 (95% CI 1.66-2.15; P<0.0001), and 1.69 (95% CI 1.45-1.98; P<0.0001), respectively. There was no excess adjusted risk of the ACS relative to stable CAD group for MI/ischemic stroke (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.94-1.22; P=0.33)., Conclusions: Bleeding risk after PCI depended on both ACS presentation and HBR, with a significant effect of ACS within 30 days.

There has been no previous prospective study evaluating 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (CoCr-EES) implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The STOPDAPT trial is a prospective multi-center single-arm study evaluating 3-month DAPT duration in all-comer population after CoCr-EES implantation. Among 1525 study patients enrolled from 58 Japanese centers, the present study compared the 1-year clinical outcomes between ACS patients (N = 487) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (N = 1038). In the ACS group, 228 patients (47%) had unstable angina and 259 patients (53%) had myocardial infarction. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, definite stent thrombosis (ST) and TIMI major/minor bleeding. Thienopyridine was discontinued within 4-month in 455 patients (94.0%) in the ACS group and 977 patients (94.3%) in the stable CAD group. Cumulative 1-year incidence of and the adjusted risk for the primary endpoint were not significantly different between the ACS and stable CAD groups (2.3% vs. 3.0%, P = 0.42, and HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.44-1.87, P = 0.87). In the 3-month landmark analysis, cumulative incidence of the primary endpoint was also not significantly different between the ACS and stable CAD groups (1.3% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.16). There was no definite/probable ST through 1-year in both groups. In the propensity matched analysis, the cumulative 1-year incidence of the primary endpoint were similar between the ACS and stable CAD groups (2.3% versus 2.1%, P = 0.82). In conclusion, stopping DAPT at 3 months after CoCr-EES implantation in patients with ACS including 47% of unstable angina was as safe as that in patients with stable CAD., Competing Interests: Takeshi Kimura, Keiichi Igarashi, Kazushige Kadota, Kengo Tanabe, Yoshihiro Morino, and Ken Kozuma were advisory board members of Abbott Vascular. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

It remains unclear whether clopidogrel is better suited than aspirin as the long-term antiplatelet monotherapy following dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study compared clopidogrel monotherapy following 1 month of DAPT (clopidogrel group) with aspirin monotherapy following 12 months of DAPT (aspirin group) after PCI for 5 years. STOPDAPT-2 (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy 2) is a multicenter, open-label, adjudicator-blinded, randomized clinical trial conducted in Japan. Patients who underwent PCI with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents were randomized in a 1-to-1 fashion either to clopidogrel or aspirin groups. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or definite stent thrombosis) or major bleeding (TIMI major or minor bleeding). Among 3,005 study patients (age: 68.6 ± 10.7 years; women: 22.3%; acute coronary syndrome: 38.3%), 2,934 patients (97.6%) completed the 5-year follow-up (adherence to the study drugs at 395 days: 84.7% and 75.9%). The clopidogrel group compared with the aspirin group was noninferior but not superior for the primary endpoint (11.75% and 13.57%, respectively; HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.70-1.05; P noninferiority < 0.001; P superiority = 0.13), whereas it was superior for the cardiovascular outcomes (8.61% and 11.05%, respectively; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.97; P = 0.03) and not superior for major bleeding (4.44% and 4.92%, respectively; HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.64-1.25; P = 0.51). By the 1-year landmark analysis, clopidogrel was numerically, but not significantly, superior to aspirin for cardiovascular events (6.79% and 8.68%, respectively; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.59-1.01; P = 0.06) without difference in major bleeding (3.99% and 3.32%, respectively; HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.84-1.81; P = 0.31). Clopidogrel might be an attractive alternative to aspirin with a borderline ischemic benefit beyond 1 year after PCI. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic, progressive liver disease associated with dyslipidemia. There is a consensus that PBC does not accelerate coronary artery disease despite high cholesterol levels, so the screening test for the coronary artery is not routinely performed before liver transplantation (LT). To date, no report has described the potential risk of PBC-related dyslipidemia for developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after LT. Case presentation: A 40-year-old Asian female with a known history of PBC underwent ABO-incompatible living-donor LT, with her husband as the donor. Although she had high cholesterol and triglyceride levels that were refractory to medications, she passed all routine preoperative examinations, including cardiopulmonary function tests and infection screenings. One week after LT, she developed ACS with 90% stenosis of both the left anterior descending artery and left circumflex artery. Emergent stent implantation was successfully performed followed by dual antiplatelet therapy. The long history of PBC and associated severe dyslipidemia for 10 years would have accelerated the atherosclerosis, causing latent stenosis in the coronary artery. Inapparent stenosis might have become apparent due to unstable hemodynamics during the acute phase after LT. Conclusions: PBC-related dyslipidemia potentially brings a risk for developing ACS after LT. This experience suggests that the preoperative evaluation of the coronary artery should be considered for high-risk patients, especially those who have drug-resistant dyslipidemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]