Key result
Antiplatelet therapy cuts post-stenting bleeding and vascular complications ~40% vs. conventional anticoagulation.
Why the study?
The safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy alone after coronary stenting in an unselected population had not been evaluated.
Does antiplatelet therapy alone reduce bleeding or peripheral vascular complications compared to conventional anticoagulation in patients undergoing coronary stenting?
RCT (n=485)
Yes
Does antiplatelet therapy alone reduce bleeding or peripheral vascular complications compared to conventional anticoagulation in patients undergoing coronary stenting?
Odds Ratio: 0.6 (95% CI 0.36–0.98)
Absolute Event Rate: 13.5% vs 21%
p-value: p=0.03
Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and ticlopidine is safer and more effective than conventional anticoagulation after coronary stenting, significantly reducing bleeding, subacute stent occlusion, and hospital stay.
Antiplatelet therapy reduces bleeding complications after stenting; confirms DAPT superiority over anticoagulation as standard.
BACKGROUND: Dual therapy with ticlopidine and aspirin has been shown to be as effective as or more effective than conventional anticoagulation in patients with an optimal result after implantation of intracoronary metallic stents. However, the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy alone in an unselected population has not been evaluated. METHODS: Patients were randomized to conventional anticoagulation or to treatment with antiplatelet therapy alone. Indications for stenting were classified as elective (decided before the procedure) or unplanned (to salvage failed angioplasty or to optimize the results of balloon angioplasty). After stenting, patients received aspirin and either ticlopidine or conventional anticoagulation (heparin or oral anticoagulant). The primary end point was the occurrence of bleeding or peripheral vascular complications; secondary end points were cardiac events (death, infarction, or stent occlusion) and duration of hospitalization. RESULTS: In 13 centers, 236 patients were randomized to anticoagulation and 249 to antiplatelet therapy. Stenting was elective in 58% of patients and unplanned in 42%. Stent implantation was successfully achieved in 99% of patients. A primary end point occurred in 33 patients (13.5%) in the antiplatelet group and 48 patients (21%) in the anticoagulation group (odds ratio=0.6 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.98], P=0.03). Major cardiac-related events in electively stented patients were less common (odds ratio=0.23 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.91], P=0.01) in the antiplatelet group (3 of 123, 2.4%) than the anticoagulation group (11 of 111, 9.9%). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the antiplatelet group (4.3+/-3.6 versus 6. 4+/-3.7 days, P=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting significantly reduced rates of bleeding and subacute stent occlusion compared with conventional anticoagulation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bertrand et al. (1998) conducted an RCT in Unplanned and elective coronary stenting (n=485). Antiplatelet therapy vs. Conventional anticoagulation was evaluated on Occurrence of bleeding or peripheral vascular complications (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.98, p=0.03). Antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting reduced bleeding or peripheral vascular complications compared with conventional anticoagulation (13.5% vs 21%; OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.36-0.98; P=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: