Key result
In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, exposure to prasugrel or ticagrelor was associated with similar rates of unadjusted 30-day MACE compared to clopidogrel (3% vs 4% vs 3%, P=0.57).
Why the study?
Does prasugrel or ticagrelor improve major adverse cardiovascular events compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Cohort (n=1,850)
Yes
Does prasugrel or ticagrelor improve major adverse cardiovascular events compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
p-value: p=0.57
In a contemporary Australian registry of ACS patients undergoing PCI, there were no significant differences in unadjusted 30-day MACE or in-hospital bleeding between clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Does not support preferring potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel in ACS PCI; leaves open need for adjusted or randomized confirmation.
Yudi et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n=1,850). Prasugrel or ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (p=0.57). In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, exposure to prasugrel or ticagrelor was associated with similar rates of unadjusted 30-day MACE compared to clopidogrel (3% vs 4% vs 3%, P=0.57).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: