RESUMO
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is currently the standard of care after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent studies suggest that reducing DAPT to 1-3 months followed by an aspirin-free single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) strategy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor is safe and associated with less bleeding. However, to date, no randomised trial has tested the impact of initiating SAPT immediately after PCI, particularly in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). NEOMINDSET is a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial with a blinded outcome assessment designed to compare SAPT versus DAPT in 3,400 ACS patients undergoing PCI with the latest-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). After successful PCI and up to 4 days following hospital admission, patients are randomised to receive SAPT with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor (ticagrelor or prasugrel) or DAPT (aspirin plus a potent P2Y12 inhibitor) for 12 months. Aspirin is discontinued immediately after randomisation in the SAPT group. The choice between ticagrelor and prasugrel is at the investigator's discretion. The primary hypothesis is that SAPT will be non-inferior to DAPT with respect to the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction or urgent target vessel revascularisation, but superior to DAPT on rates of bleeding defined by Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5 criteria. NEOMINDSET is the first study that is specifically designed to test SAPT versus DAPT immediately following PCI with DES in ACS patients. This trial will provide important insights on the efficacy and safety of withdrawing aspirin in the early phase of ACS. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04360720).
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Stents Farmacológicos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/cirurgia , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/uso terapêutico , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Low platelet reactivity levels are associated with higher risk of bleeding in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy relative to patients with optimal platelet blockade. This study set out to evaluate the prevalence of low platelet reactivity in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with ticagrelor and aspirin. METHODS: Patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction who were already undergoing dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and ticagrelor were enrolled. Blood samples were collected 1 hour before and 2 hours after the maintenance dose of ticagrelor to investigate trough and the peak effects of the drug respectively. Platelet reactivity was measured by three methods: Multiplate®, PFA-100® with Innovance® PFA-P2Y cartridge and PFA-100® with Collagen/ADP cartridge. Platelet reactivity was assessed in the presence of peak levels of ticagrelor and defined according to previously validated cut-offs for each method (<19 AUC, >299 seconds and >116 seconds respectively). The level of significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled (44% with ST-elevation). Median duration of DAPT was 3 days (interquartile range, 2-5 days). On average, peak and trough platelet reactivity were markedly low and did not differ between different methods. Low platelet reactivity was common, but varied according to analytic method (PFA-100®/Innovance®PFA-P2Y: 86%; Multiplate®: 74%; PFA-100®/Collagen/ADP: 48%; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Low platelet reactivity was very common in patients with acute myocardial infarction submitted to dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and aspirin. Findings of this study justify the investigation of less intensive platelet inhibition strategies aimed at reducing the risk of bleeding in this population, such as lower dose regimens or monotherapy with P2Y12 inhibitors.
Assuntos
Aspirina , Infarto do Miocárdio , Difosfato de Adenosina/uso terapêutico , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Infarto do Miocárdio/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Infarto do Miocárdio , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Difosfato de Adenosina/farmacologia , Difosfato de Adenosina/uso terapêutico , Clopidogrel/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Microcirculação , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/tratamento farmacológico , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/etiologia , Ticagrelor/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with both diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are a subpopulation characterized by ultrahigh ischemic and bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention. There are limited data on the impact of ticagrelor monotherapy among these patients. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the GLOBAL-LEADERS trial, the treatment effects of the experimental (one-month dual-antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy) versus the reference regimen (12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin alone) were analyzed according to DM/CKD status. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction at 2-years. The patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) was defined as the composite of all-cause death, any stroke, site-reported MI and any revascularization, whereas net adverse clinical events (NACE) combined POCE with BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events. RESULTS: At 2 years, the DM + /CKD + patients had significantly higher incidences of the primary endpoint (9.5% versus 3.1%, adjusted HR 2.16; 95% CI [1.66-2.80], p < 0.001), BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events, stroke, site-reported myocardial infraction, all revascularization, POCE, and NACE, compared with the DM-/CKD- patients. Among the DM + /CKD + patients, after adjustment, there were no significant differences in the primary endpoints between the experimental and reference regimen; however, the experimental regimen was associated with lower rates of POCE (20.6% versus 25.9%, HR 0.74; 95% CI [0.55-0.99], p = 0.043, pinteraction = 0.155) and NACE (22.7% versus 28.3%, HR 0.75; 95% CI [0.56-0.99], p = 0.044, pinteraction = 0.310), which was mainly driven by a lower rate of all revascularization, as compared with the reference regimen. The landmark analysis showed that while the experimental and reference regimen had similar rates of all the clinical endpoints during the first year, the experimental regimen was associated with significantly lower rates of POCE (5.8% versus 11.0%, HR 0.49; 95% CI [0.29-0.82], p = 0.007, pinteraction = 0.040) and NACE (5.8% versus 11.2%, HR 0.48; 95% CI [0.29-0.82], p = 0.007, pinteraction = 0.013) in the second year. CONCLUSION: Among patients with both DM and CKD, ticagrelor monotherapy was not associated with lower rates of all-cause death or new Q-wave, or major bleeding complications; however, it was associated with lower rates of POCE and NACE. These findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01813435).
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Renal Crônica , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ásia , Austrália , Brasil , Canadá , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/mortalidade , Stents Farmacológicos , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/mortalidade , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico , Infarto do Miocárdio/mortalidade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/instrumentação , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/mortalidade , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Prevalência , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recidiva , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/mortalidade , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Prevenção Secundária , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/mortalidade , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Ticagrelor is an antiplatelet agent approved for the treatment of patients with an acute coronary syndrome or a history of myocardial infarction. Considering the evidence demonstrating that ticagrelor-mediated inhibition of platelet activation and aggregation have beneficial effects in the treatment of thrombotic conditions, clinical studies have been conducted to evaluate the use of this drug for the treatment of sickle cell disease (SCD), demonstrating satisfactory tolerability and safety. AREAS COVERED: Clinical investigation has characterized the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamical profile, as well as the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor to prevent painful vaso-occlusive crisis (painful episodes and acute chest syndrome) in SCD patients. EXPERT OPINION: While phase 1 and 2 clinical trials demonstrated satisfactory tolerability and safety, the conclusion of phase 3 clinical trials is crucial to prove the efficacy of ticagrelor as a therapeutic option for the treatment of SCD. Thus, it is expected that ticagrelor, especially in combination with other drugs, will improve the clinical profile and quality of life of patients with SCD.
Assuntos
Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/uso terapêutico , Trombofilia/tratamento farmacológico , Trombofilia/etiologia , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Anemia Falciforme/sangue , Coagulação Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , Ensaios Clínicos Fase I como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase II como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Monitoramento de Medicamentos , Humanos , Estrutura Molecular , Ativação Plaquetária/efeitos dos fármacos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/química , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/farmacologia , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/química , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/farmacologia , Trombofilia/prevenção & controle , Ticagrelor/química , Ticagrelor/farmacocinética , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
O Informe Diário de Evidências é uma produção do Ministério da Saúde que tem como objetivo acompanhar diariamente as publicações científicas sobre tratamento farmacológico e vacinas para a COVID-19. Dessa forma, são realizadas buscas estruturadas em bases de dados biomédicas, referentes ao dia anterior desse informe. Não são incluídos estudos pré-clínicos (in vitro, in vivo, in silico). A frequência dos estudos é demonstrada de acordo com a sua classificação metodológica (revisões sistemáticas, ensaios clínicos randomizados, coortes, entre outros). Para cada estudo é apresentado um resumo com avaliação da qualidade metodológica. Essa avaliação tem por finalidade identificar o grau de certeza/confiança ou o risco de viés de cada estudo. Para tal, são utilizadas ferramentas já validadas e consagradas na literatura científica, na área de saúde baseada em evidências. Cabe ressaltar que o documento tem caráter informativo e não representa uma recomendação oficial do Ministério da Saúde sobre a temática. Foram encontrados 21 artigos e 15 protocolos.
Assuntos
Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Imunoglobulinas/uso terapêutico , Metilprednisolona/uso terapêutico , Vacinas/uso terapêutico , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , Heparina de Baixo Peso Molecular/uso terapêutico , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , Combinação de Medicamentos , Proteína Antagonista do Receptor de Interleucina 1/uso terapêutico , Células-Tronco Mesenquimais , Darunavir/uso terapêutico , Adalimumab/uso terapêutico , Rituximab/uso terapêutico , Infliximab/uso terapêutico , Clopidogrel/uso terapêutico , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapêutico , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the association of pulse pressure (PP) and different antiplatelet regimes with clinical and safety outcomes in an all-comers percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population. METHODS: In this analysis of GLOBAL LEADERS (n = 15,936) we compared the experimental therapy of 23 months of ticagrelor after 1 month of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) vs standard DAPT for 12 months followed by aspirin monotherapy in subjects who underwent PCI and were divided into 2 groups according to the median PP (60 mm Hg). The primary end point (all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction) and the composite end points: patient-oriented composite end points (POCE), Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5, and net adverse clinical events (NACE) were evaluated. RESULTS: At 2 years, subjects in the high-PP group (n = 7971) had similar rates of the primary end point (4.3% vs 3.9%; P = 0.058), POCE (14.9% vs 12.7%; P = 0.051), and BARC 3 or 5 (2.5% vs 1.7%; P = 0.355) and higher rates of NACE (16.4% vs 13.7%; P = 0.037) compared with the low-PP group (n = 7965). Among patients with PP < 60 mm Hg, the primary end point (3.4% vs 4.4%, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.96), POCE (11.8% vs 13.5%, aHR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76-0.98), NACE (12.8% vs 14.7%, aHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.96), and BARC 3 or 5 (1.4% vs 2.1%, aHR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49-0.97) were lower with ticagrelor monotherapy compared with DAPT. The only significant interaction was for BARC 3 or 5 (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: After contemporary PCI, subjects with high PP levels experienced high rates of NACE at 2 years. In those with low PP, ticagrelor monotherapy led to a lower risk of bleeding events compared with standard DAPT.
Assuntos
Pressão Sanguínea , Terapia Antiplaquetária Dupla , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Feminino , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mortalidade , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
INTRODUÇÃO: Nas últimas décadas, o uso de anticoagulantes vem se tornando mais frequente na população e em faixas etárias mais jovens.OBJETIVO: O objetivo desse artigo é abordar o risco das medicações anticoagulantes mais utilizadas em cirurgia dermatológica.MÉTODOS: Foi realizada revisão das medicações anticoagulantes mais utilizadas.RESULTADOS: A consulta pré-cirúrgica realizada adequadamente, com ênfase ao histórico clínico do paciente (incluindo função renal nos casos de uso dos novos anticoagulantes orais), a localização anatômica abordada e a exata programação do tratamento cirúrgico são essenciais para um desfecho adequado.CONCLUSÕES: A utilização de medicações anticoagulantes é cada vez mais frequente na prática médica. Em pacientes recebendo medicações anticoagulantes é essencial a estrita adesão às boas práticas cirúrgicas, com especial atenção à hemostasia adequada do campo cirúrgico, aos curativos adequados e compressivos e aos cuidados pós-operatórios, sendo o paciente devidamente informado sobre os maiores riscos aos quais está sujeito(AU).
Introduction: In the last decades, anticoagulants have become more frequent in the population and younger age groups. Objective: This article aims to address the risk of the most used anticoagulant medications in dermatological surgeries. Methods: We reviewed the most common anticoagulant medications. Results: The pre-surgical consultation performed correctly, emphasizing the patient's clinical history (including renal function in cases of use of new oral anticoagulants), the anatomical site addressed, and the surgical treatment schedule is essential for a satisfactory outcome. Conclusions: The use of anticoagulant medications is increasingly common in medical practice. In patients receiving anticoagulant medications, strict adherence to good surgical practices is essential. Special attention to adequate hemostasis of the surgical field, adequate and compressive dressings and postoperative care must be given. The patient should be adequately informed about the most significant risks to which he is subject(AU).
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Dermatológicos , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Varfarina/uso terapêutico , Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Dipiridamol/uso terapêutico , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/uso terapêutico , Rivaroxabana/uso terapêutico , Dabigatrana/uso terapêutico , Clopidogrel/uso terapêutico , Ticagrelor/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is the most common hemoglobinopathy, occurring worldwide, and vaso-occlusive events (VOEs) are its paramount, hallmark clinical manifestation. Evidence exists that platelets play an important role in generating VOEs. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical benefits and harms of antiplatelet agents for preventing VOEs in patients with SCD. METHODS: We conducted searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; up to 2018, issue 3 of 12), PubMed/MEDLINE (up to April 20, 2018), and the Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE; from 1980 to week 16 of 2018). We also searched the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) database, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) website, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and www.ClinicalTrials.gov. We checked the bibliographies of included studies and any relevant systematic reviews. Our systematic review included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted in people who had SCD without VOEs at trial entry. Eligible trials compared a single or combination treatment regimen (with each treatment classified as a conventional or nonconventional antiplatelet agent) with conventional care, placebo, or another regimen. No restrictions were placed on the route of administration, dose, frequency, or duration of treatment. We selected RCTs, assessed the risk for bias, and extracted data in a duplicate and independent fashion. We estimated risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes. We also subjected our analyses to a random-effects model, and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) was used. We used the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the overall quality of data for each individual outcome. RESULTS: We identified 5 RCTs (N=747) that met our criteria. Of these, 4 trials were multicenter and multinational. The trials included patients of all ages and assessed prasugrel, ticagrelor, crizanlizumab, and aspirin vs either placebo or no intervention. The most frequent route of administration was oral. The trials were small and carried a high risk for bias, given that pharmaceutical companies sponsored 4 of them. None of the trials reported information on quality of life. No meta-analysis was performed owing to heterogeneity in the ages of the participants and in the interventions. No single trial showed evidence of certainty regarding all-cause mortality. One trial showed uncertainty in comparing prasugrel vs placebo for preventing VOEs in patients younger than 18 years (relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.06; low quality of evidence). TSA for this outcome suggested that a new trial should be conducted. One trial found a difference in the size effect of uncomplicated VOEs, favoring high-dose crizanlizumab vs placebo (mean difference, -1.50; 95% CI, -2.61 to -0.39; very low quality of evidence). No difference in VOEs was found in studies that compared either ticagrelor in children or prasugrel in adults vs placebo. The overall incidence of harms in any intervention did not differ from that in the control. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence does not support or reject the use of any antiplatelet agent for preventing VOEs in people with SCD. This conclusion was based on small RCTs that carried a high risk for bias. No conclusive evidence exists regarding relevant clinical outcomes because the evidence is limited and of very low quality.
Assuntos
Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Doenças Vasculares/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Anemia Falciforme/fisiopatologia , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Mortalidade , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/classificação , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/efeitos adversos , Cloridrato de Prasugrel/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Ticagrelor/efeitos adversos , Ticagrelor/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento , Doenças Vasculares/etiologia , Doenças Vasculares/fisiopatologiaRESUMO
Massive hyphaema presentation after a laser iridotomy is very rare. We report a 63-year-old man with ischaemic heart disease on dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus ticagrelor) who was diagnosed as a primary angle-closure suspect and was to undergo a neodymium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet laser iridotomy at Centro Oftalmológico Virgilio Galvis, Floridablanca, Colombia in 2016. While performing the iridotomy in the left eye, active bleeding occurred that finally filled approximately 75% of the anterior chamber. Intraocular pressure (IOP) increased to 62 mmHg. Mannitol and a topical dorzolamide/timolol were used to control the increase in IOP. The hyphaema slowly resolved over the following week without sequelae. This case revealed that massive hyphaema can complicate laser iridotomy in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy, although this is rare. Therefore, if patients are taking aspirin and ticagrelor, it would be advisable to stop the second medication if possible. In addition, sequential application of photocoagulation and photodisruption lasers might diminish the risk of significant bleeding.