Search

As a part of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), prasugrel or ticagrelor is prescribed along with aspirin to patients of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to assess if the PRECISE-DAPT score, which provides prediction of bleeding during DAPT, could be used to choose between prasugrel and ticagrelor for DAPT initiation. 181 patients out of which 71 received prasugrel and 110 received ticagrelor were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. PRECISE-DAPT score was calculated for everyone and was used to dichotomize patients into two subgroups (score <25 and ≥25). After balancing potential confounders in baseline characteristics of the subgroups using propensity scores, comparison of a composite outcome of 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (4P-MACE) (i.e., cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or coronary revascularization due to stent thrombosis) and bleeding (any type as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) within 1-year post-PCI was performed among the subgroups using Cox proportional hazards regression. Prasugrel was associated with lower and comparatively higher 4P-MACE events in subgroups with score ≥25 (HR: 0.17; 95% CI, 0.04-0.77) and score <25 (HR: 3.58; 95% CI, 0.62-20.70) respectively. For bleeding outcome, prasugrel trended towards more clinical benefit for scores ≥25 (HR: 0.44; 95% CI, 0.10-1.93) than <25 (HR: 0.93; 95% CI, 0.13-6.58). Therefore, prasugrel was associated with better clinical effectiveness and trended towards a lower bleeding risk compared to ticagrelor within 1-year post-PCI for those with a high PRECISE-DAPT score (≥25). This finding requires validation through larger studies., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor or prasugrel is the mainstay of treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to systematically perform a head-to-head comparison of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy and safety., Methods: We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for relevant published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was adverse cardiovascular events and secondary outcome was bleeding events. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to obtain the pooled estimate of each outcome., Results: Nine RCTs with a total number of 6990 patients (3550 treated with prasugrel and 3481 treated with ticagrelor) were included. No significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor was observed in terms of mortality (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.13, P = 0.28), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.03, P = 0.10), non-fatal myocardial infarction (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.06, P = 0.11), stroke (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.72, P = 0.95), stent thrombosis (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.21, P = 0.25), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) defined major (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.19 to 4.67, P = 0.94), minor (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.62, P = 0.18) and minimal (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.18, P = 0.11) bleeding and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) defined bleeding (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.36, P = 0.68)., Conclusion: In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, both prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar cardiovascular outcomes and adverse bleeding events.