Key result
In patients with ACS from plaque erosion managed conservatively, tirofiban increased complete thrombus resolution at 1 month compared to no tirofiban (53.1% vs 17.6%, P=0.031).
Why the study?
Does tirofiban improve thrombus resolution in patients with ACS caused by plaque erosion managed conservatively without stenting?
Cohort (n=49)
Does tirofiban improve thrombus resolution in patients with ACS caused by plaque erosion managed conservatively without stenting?
Absolute Event Rate: 53.1% vs 17.6%
p-value: p=0.031
In patients with ACS due to plaque erosion managed conservatively without stenting, the addition of tirofiban to antiplatelet therapy significantly improves thrombus resolution at 1 month without increasing major bleeding risk.
May support testing tirofiban in plaque erosion ACS; leaves open effects on clinical outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: Recent studies suggest that conservative management with antithrombotic therapy without stenting may be an option in selected patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We evaluated whether a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, tirofiban, would offer additional benefit in patients with plaque erosion presenting with ACS who were treated with antiplatelet therapy without stenting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-nine patients who completed 1-year follow-up optical coherence tomography imaging in the EROSION study were divided into two groups: tirofiban (n=32) versus no tirofiban (n=17). Thrombus volume, thrombus burden, and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events were evaluated. RESULTS: At baseline, the tirofiban group had similar thrombus volume [3.73 (1.27-12.49) vs. 3.51 (1.70-8.65) mm, P=0.983] and marginally greater thrombus burden [17.9 (10.1-26.1) vs. 10.6 (6.8-19.0)%, P=0.097]. At 1 month, the tirofiban group had smaller residual thrombus volume [0.00 (0.00-1.78) vs. 0.94 (0.07-4.20) mm, P=0.054], thrombus burden [0.0 (0.0-6.4) vs. 7.0 (1.8-14.8)%, P=0.024], and greater reduction of thrombus volume (85.4±24.6 vs. 67.1±27.1%, P=0.021). These differences were maintained up to 1 year. Complete resolution of thrombus at 1 month was more frequent in the tirofiban group (53.1 vs. 17.6%, P=0.031). None of the patients experienced major bleeding during the initial hospitalization. The 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events rate was not different (5.6 vs. 15.0%, P=0.336). CONCLUSION: In patients with ACS caused by plaque erosion who were managed conservatively without stenting, tirofiban provided additional benefit in reducing residual thrombus without an increased risk for bleeding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sugiyama et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Acute coronary syndrome with plaque erosion (n=49). Tirofiban vs. No tirofiban was evaluated on Complete resolution of thrombus at 1 month (p=0.031). In patients with ACS from plaque erosion managed conservatively, tirofiban increased complete thrombus resolution at 1 month compared to no tirofiban (53.1% vs 17.6%, P=0.031).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: