Key result
Ticagrelor 60 mg BID resulted in a significantly longer bleeding time compared to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID (897 vs 440 seconds) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.
Why the study?
Optimal long-term antithrombotic treatment in high-risk chronic coronary syndrome patients remains uncertain, prompting a comparison of ticagrelor versus low-dose rivaroxaban on hemostatic and inflammatory markers.
Does ticagrelor 60 mg BID compared to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID differentially affect bleeding time and fibrin clot lysis time in aspirin-treated CCS patients?
RCT (n=20)
Outcome assessor blinded
Crossover
No
Does ticagrelor 60 mg BID compared to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID differentially affect bleeding time and fibrin clot lysis time in aspirin-treated CCS patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 897% vs 440%
p-value: p=0.0001
In aspirin-treated CCS patients, ticagrelor prolongs bleeding time more than rivaroxaban, whereas rivaroxaban enhances fibrin clot lysis, highlighting distinct hemostatic mechanisms of dual antiplatelet versus dual antithrombotic therapy.
Differential hemostatic effects in small mechanistic study warrant no regimen change; leaves open comparative outcome trials in high-risk CCS.
Optimal long term antithrombotic treatment in high-risk chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients remains uncertain. Both ticagrelor (60 mg BID) and low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg BID) in addition to low-dose aspirin resulted in significant reductions in major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients at the expense of increased bleeding risk. We aimed to compare the effects of both strategies on bleeding time, fibrin clot lysis time and inflammatory biomarkers in CCS patients with history of acute coronary syndrome. Twenty aspirin-treated patients were recruited into a randomized crossover study to receive ticagrelor 60 mg BID in 1 week and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID in the other with a 2-week washout period in between. Outcome measures were determined at the start and end of each treatment week. Two-way ANOVA was used to determine difference in treatment effect. Data are presented as mean ± SD. At baseline, there was no significant difference in any studied outcome measure. Bleeding time was significantly longer with ticagrelor compared to rivaroxaban (Ticagrelor: 897 ± 481secs vs. Rivaroxaban: 440 ± 184 secs; p = .0001). Fibrin clot lysis time was not impacted by ticagrelor but significantly dropped post treatment with rivaroxaban (Ticagrelor: 5743 ± 2590 secs vs. Rivaroxaban: 4309 ± 2308 secs; p = .0049). Neither treatment had an impact on levels of high-sensitivity CRP or white cell count. In conclusion, ticagrelor 60 mg BID has greater impact on bleeding time compared to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID. Whereas rivaroxaban, positively modulates fibrin clots, rendering them more prone to lysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haddad et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Chronic coronary syndrome (n=20). Ticagrelor vs. Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID was evaluated on Bleeding time (p=0.0001). Ticagrelor 60 mg BID resulted in a significantly longer bleeding time compared to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID (897 vs 440 seconds) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: