Why the study?
Does switching from clopidogrel to novel P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) improve outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI?
Does switching from clopidogrel to novel P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) improve outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI?
This review highlights the rationale and practical considerations for switching ACS patients undergoing PCI from clopidogrel to more potent P2Y12 inhibitors like prasugrel or ticagrelor.
May guide switching to potent P2Y12 inhibitors in ACS-PCI; leaves open need for dedicated outcome RCTs.
Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y(12) receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Clopidogrel is the most widely used P2Y(12) receptor inhibitor. Despite the clinical benefits associated with adjunctive clopidogrel therapy, a considerable number of patients continue to experience recurrent cardiovascular events. Importantly, the interindividual response to clopidogrel is variable and is affected by multiple factors, including genetic polymorphisms and drugs that interfere with the conversion of clopidogrel to its active metabolite. The individual variability to clopidogrel-induced antiplatelet effects has significant clinical implications that can result in an increased risk of atherothrombotic recurrences, including stent thrombosis. The introduction of novel P2Y(12) receptor inhibitors, such as prasugrel or ticagrelor, characterized by more potent and consistent platelet inhibitory effects, represents an opportunity for clinicians to consider these alternative therapies to overcome the limitations of clopidogrel. Understanding the strategies and implications of switching antiplatelet treatment regimens is, therefore, key in the clinical setting. This article provides an overview of the literature on switching antiplatelet treatment strategies and practical considerations for the interventional cardiologist.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Azmoon et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: