Differential prognosis of patients that are candidates for standard, short or prolonged dual antiplatelet treatment discharged after an acute coronary syndrome.

Background: Current evidence supports the efficacy of prolonged dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) for patients at high-ischemic risk and low bleeding risk as well as the efficacy and safety of short DAPT in high-bleeding risk (HBR) patients.
Methods: We evaluated patterns of DAPT candidates in all patients discharged in 2 hospitals after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Patients categorized in 3 groups: 1) short-DAPT candidates if they met 1 major o 2 minor criteria for HBR, by the 2019 ARC-HBR criteria; 2) prolonged-DAPT candidates if were not HBR and had recurrent ACS, complex percutaneous coronary interventions or diabetes; 3) standard 12 months DAPT if were not include in the previous 2 groups. Major bleeding (MB) was registered according to 3 or 5 of the BARC consortium definitions.
Results: We included 8252 patients and 3215 (39 %) were candidates for abbreviated DAPT, 3119 (37.8 %) for prolonged DAPT, and 1918 (23.2 %) for 12 m DAPT. Relevant differences were observed between the 3 categories beyond the bleeding risk. Median follow-up was 57 months. Multivariate analysis identified higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.96 95 % CI 1.45-2.67; p < 0.001), cardiovascular mortality (HR: 2.10 95 % CI 1.39-3.19; p < 0.011), MACE (HR: 1.69 95 % 1.50-2.02; p < 0.001) and MB (sHR: 3.41 95 % CI 1.45-8.02; p = 0.005) in candidates to short DAPT. Candidates to prolonged DAPT had higher risk of MACE (HR: 1.17 95 % CI 1.02-1.35; p = 0.027).
Conclusions: Almost two thirds of patients discharged after an ACS would be candidates for short or prolonged DAPT and these patients are at higher risk of MACE and mortality.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Alberto Cordero reports a) honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, AMGEN, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ferrer, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Daichy Sankio, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Amarin; b) consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Ferrer, Sanofi, AMGEN, Novartis, Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Amarin.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)