Switching of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitor Treatment in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Prevalence, Predictors, and Prognosis
- 21 Downloads
Background and Objective
Dual antiplatelet therapy is one of the main treatments in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Switching antiplatelet agents may be necessary in some patients to improve efficacy or safety. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence, predictors, and implications of clinical switching in patients during hospital admission and 1-year follow-up at discharge.
Observational, prospective, multicenter registry study in patients discharged following an admission for ACS and followed up for 1 year. We analyzed ischemic and bleeding events as well as treatment changes.
We recruited 1717 patients; in-hospital switching occurred in 425 (24.8%): 15.1% to clopidogrel and 84.9% to newer antiplatelet drugs (prasugrel or ticagrelor). Those switched to newer antiplatelets were younger, with lower scores on the GRACE and CRUSADE scales, admitted more frequently for ST-elevation myocardial infarction and underwent more invasive management and percutaneous revascularization. The clinical cardiologist was responsible for most in-hospital switching to newer antiplatelets (79.6%). The loading dose of the second antiplatelet did not affect incidence of bleeding events. Post-discharge switching was infrequent (2%) and depended mainly on clinical indications; only 30% was related to a new ACS.
In a contemporary registry with ACS, in-hospital switching of antiplatelet drugs was frequent. Those switched to newer antiplatelets were younger and admitted more frequently for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Post-discharge switching was infrequent.
This work was supported by the Spanish Society of Cardiology (Project of Clinical Research in Cardiology Dr. Pedro Zarco 2016).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No sources of funding.
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
All procedures in this study were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration (and its amendments), and the requirements of the Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board that approved the study.
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.
- 1.James S, Akerblom A, Cannon CP, Emanuelsson H, Husted S, Katus H, et al. Comparison of ticagrelor, the first reversible oral P2Y12 receptor antagonist, with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Am Heart J. 2009;157:599–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Hochholzer W, Wiviott SD, Antman EM, Contant CF, Guo J, Giugliano RP, et al. Predictors of bleeding and time dependence of association of bleeding with mortality: insights from the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38 (TRITON-TIMI 38). Circulation. 2011;123:2681–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Alexopoulos D, Xanthopoulou I, Deftereos S, Sitafidis G, Kanakakis I, Hamilos M, et al. In-hospital switching of oral P2Y12 inhibitor treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Prevalence, predictors and short-term outcome. Am Heart J. 2014;167:68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet J-P, Mueller C, Valgimigli M, Andreotti F, et al. ESC. 2015 guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:267–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, Casey DE, Ganiats TG, Holmes DR, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am CollCardiol. 2014;64:139–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Costa F, Jeppsson A, et al. 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: The Task Force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2018;39:213–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Esteve-Pastor MA, Ruiz-Nodar JM, Orenes-Piñero E, Rivera-Caravaca JM, Quintana-Giner M, Veliz A, et al. Temporal trends in the use of antiplatelet therapy in patients witch acute coronary syndromes. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2017;23(37):107424841772486.Google Scholar
- 12.Bagai A, Wang Y, Wang TY, Curtis JP, Gurm HS, Shah B, et al. In-hospital switching between clopidogrel and prasugrel among patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: insights into contemporary practice from the national cardiovascular data registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:585–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bagai A, Peterson E, Honeycutt E, Effron M, Cohen D, Goodman S, et al. In-hospital switching between adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention: insights intro contemporary practice from the TRANSLATE-ACS study. Eur Heat J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2015;4(6):499–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Almendro-Delia M, Blanco-Ponce E, Gomez-Domínguez R, Gonzalez-Matos C, Lobo-Gonzalez M, Caballero-Garcia A, et al. Safety and efficacy of in-hospital clopidogrel-to-prasugrel switching in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Analysis from the real world. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2015;39:499–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.De Luca L, D’Ascenszo F, Musumeci G, Saia F, Parodi G, Varbella F, et al. Incidence and outcome of switching of oral platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SCOPE registry. EuroIntervention. 2017;13(4):459–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar