Why the study?
Patients with diabetes mellitus have an increased risk of thrombotic complications and may achieve enhanced absolute benefit from more potent antithrombotic approaches, warranting an overview of current and evolving strategies.
Does intensified antithrombotic therapy reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus?
Does intensified antithrombotic therapy reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus?
In patients with CAD and diabetes, intensified antithrombotic therapy offers enhanced absolute benefit for cardiovascular event prevention, with net clinical benefit favoring its use in those without high bleeding risk.
May support intensified antithrombotic therapy in low-bleeding-risk DM-CAD patients; leaves open dedicated RCTs for confirmation.
inhibitor), and dual-pathway inhibition (eg, aspirin combined with the vascular dose of the direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban) for patients with chronic ischemic heart disease, acute coronary syndromes, and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Because of their increased risk of thrombotic complications, patients with DM commonly achieve enhanced absolute benefit from more potent antithrombotic approaches compared with those without DM, which most often occurs at the expense of increased bleeding. Nevertheless, studies have shown that when excluding individuals at high risk for bleeding, the net clinical benefit favors the use of intensified long-term antithrombotic therapy in patients with DM and CAD. Several studies are ongoing to establish the role of novel antithrombotic strategies and drug formulations in maximizing the net benefit of antithrombotic therapy for patients with DM. The scope of this review article is to provide an overview of current and evolving antithrombotic strategies for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in patients with CAD and DM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Capodanno et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: