Back to Search Start Over

Bedside Monitoring to Adjust Antiplatelet Therapy for Coronary Stenting.

Authors :
Collet, Jean-Philippe
Cuisset, Thomas
Rangé, Grégoire
Cayla, Guillaume
Elhadad, Simon
Pouillot, Christophe
Henry, Patrick
Motreff, Pascal
Carrié, Didier
Boueri, Ziad
Belle, Loic
Van Belle, Eric
Rousseau, Hélène
Aubry, Pierre
Monségu, Jacques
Sabouret, Pierre
O'Connor, Stephen A.
Abtan, Jérémie
Kerneis, Mathieu
Saint-Etienne, Christophe
Source :
New England Journal of Medicine. 11/29/2012, Vol. 367 Issue 22, p2100-2109. 10p. 1 Diagram.
Publication Year :
2012

Abstract

Background: Patients' responses to oral antiplatelet therapy are subject to variation. Bedside monitoring offers the opportunity to improve outcomes after coronary stenting by individualizing therapy. Methods: We randomly assigned 2440 patients scheduled for coronary stenting at 38 centers to a strategy of platelet-function monitoring, with drug adjustment in patients who had a poor response to antiplatelet therapy, or to a conventional strategy without monitoring and drug adjustment. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization 1 year after stent implantation. For patients in the monitoring group, the VerifyNow P2Y12 and aspirin point-of-care assays were used in the catheterization laboratory before stent implantation and in the outpatient clinic 2 to 4 weeks later. Results: In the monitoring group, high platelet reactivity in patients taking clopidogrel (34.5% of patients) or aspirin (7.6%) led to the administration of an additional bolus of clopidogrel, prasugrel, or aspirin along with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during the procedure. The primary end point occurred in 34.6% of the patients in the monitoring group, as compared with 31.1% of those in the conventional-treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98 to 1.29; P=0.10). The main secondary end point, stent thrombosis or any urgent revascularization, occurred in 4.9% of the patients in the monitoring group and 4.6% of those in the conventional-treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52; P=0.77). The rate of major bleeding events did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusions: This study showed no significant improvements in clinical outcomes with platelet-function monitoring and treatment adjustment for coronary stenting, as compared with standard antiplatelet therapy without monitoring. (Funded by Allies in Cardiovascular Trials Initiatives and Organized Networks and others; ARCTIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00827411.) [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00284793
Volume :
367
Issue :
22
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
New England Journal of Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
83771272
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1209979