Why the study?
Does ticagrelor bolus following clopidogrel loading improve platelet inhibition compared to ticagrelor alone in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI?
Does ticagrelor bolus following clopidogrel loading improve platelet inhibition compared to ticagrelor alone in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI?
In STEMI patients undergoing PPCI, administering a ticagrelor bolus after clopidogrel loading provides more rapid and profound platelet inhibition than ticagrelor alone.
Sequential clopidogrel-ticagrelor loading may accelerate platelet inhibition in STEMI PPCI; hypothesis-generating and requires RCT confirmation.
BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) ticagrelor is superior to clopidogrel in reducing cardiovascular events. This study sought to evaluate the effect of clopidogrel pretreatment on the pharmacodynamics of ticagrelor in patients undergoing PPCI. METHODS: We measured platelet reactivity using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay at baseline, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours following ticagrelor bolus in patients previously loaded with clopidogrel (C+T) and in thienopyridine-naive patients (T) referred to our centre for PPCI. RESULTS: In total, 52 consecutive eligible patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were enrolled (27 C+T and 25 T). Baseline characteristics and mean baseline platelet reactivity units (PRUs) were similar between the groups. The primary endpoint, the proportion of patients achieving a PRU<208 at 2 hours, was more frequently achieved in the C+T group compared to T treatment (76.0% vs 44.4%, p= 0.026). Notably, C+T therapy resulted in fewer patients with high platelet reactivity at 1 hour (56.0% vs. 14.8%), 4 hours (100.0% vs. 61.5%) and 6 hours (100.0% vs. 64%, p<0.01 for all comparisons). Furthermore, C+T therapy was associated with lower PRU values from 2 to 48 hours. CONCLUSIONS: In patients referred for PPCI, ticagrelor bolus following clopidogrel resulted in more rapid and profound platelet inhibition, demonstrating a positive pharmacodynamic interaction. Further study is needed to determine if this pharmacodynamic effect translates into reduced clinical events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hibbert et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: