Dual‐Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: How Short Is Too Short?

HomeJournal of the American Heart AssociationVol. 12, No. 2Dual‐Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: How Short Is Too Short? Open AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toOpen AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBDual‐Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: How Short Is Too Short? Philipp Mourikis and Amin Polzin Philipp MourikisPhilipp Mourikis *Correspondence to: Philipp Mourikis, MD, Heinrich Heine University Medical Center Dusseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, Düsseldorf N/A 40225, Germany. Email: E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5406-3937 , Division of Cardiology, Pulmonology, and Vascular Medicine, Medical Faculty, , Heinrich Heine University Medical Center Dusseldorf, , Dusseldorf, , Germany, Search for more papers by this author and Amin PolzinAmin Polzin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5891-9672 , Division of Cardiology, Pulmonology, and Vascular Medicine, Medical Faculty, , Heinrich Heine University Medical Center Dusseldorf, , Dusseldorf, , Germany, Search for more papers by this author Originally published16 Jan 2023https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028775Journal of the American Heart Association. 2023;12:e028775This article is a commentary on the followingLong‐Term Outcomes and Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Intervention With Second‐Generation Drug‐Eluting Stents: The Veterans Affairs Extended DAPT StudyOther version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 16, 2023: Ahead of Print Dual‐antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients presenting with chronic coronary syndrome as well as acute coronary syndrome.1 However, optimal duration of DAPT is a matter of debate. On the one hand, ischemic risk, especially early after PCI, is high and should be reduced by DAPT. On the other hand, DAPT goes in line with an enhanced risk for bleeding events. Especially in patients with further comorbidities or at advanced age, bleeding risk is substantially increased.2, 3 For a long time, reduction of ischemic events was the main aspect of DAPT. However, this changed substantially as bleeding is recognized as a relevant factor with impact on hard outcome end points, such as death. The relevance of bleeding is underlined by recent randomized controlled trials. In PEGASUS‐TIMI 54, for example, a DAPT regimen with ticagrelor led to no reduction of all‐cause death, although rate of myocardial infarction was reduced.4 In contrast, the COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial revealed a reduction in death from any cause without a significant decrease of myocardial infarction.5 Preventing ischemic events, like myocardial infarction, is still the main purpose of DAPT. However, reduction of bleeding events, which also contribute to hard end points, like all‐cause death, is a major challenge for the upcoming years. Recent guidelines recommend DAPT for 12 months after acute coronary syndrome with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction6 and non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction. However, in patients presenting with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, shorter duration of DAPT may be considered in patients with high or very high bleeding risk.7 After PCI in patients presenting with chronic coronary syndrome, DAPT duration of 6 months is recommended. However, shortening to at least 1 month or extension up to ≥12 months is also supported by the guidelines in dependence of ischemic and bleeding risk.1In this issue of the Journal of the American Heart Association (JAHA), Kinlay et al evaluated real‐world data from the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System for duration of DAPT and long‐term outcomes.8 Particularly noteworthy is the long follow‐up of up to 13 years. However, as excellently pointed out by the authors, the focus is mainly on the outcome within 2 years after index PCI, because the relevance of the DAPT duration for the long‐term outcome of several years is questionable. Their major findings were as follows: (1) a discontinuation of DAPT before 9 months after PCI was associated with an increased risk for death (cardiovascular and noncardiovascular) and (2) discontinuation after 9 months lead to reduced rates of bleeding, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction. Reduced bleeding rates are logical after discontinuation of DAPT. However, reduced risk for myocardial infarction is surprising, and the reason for this remains unclear. Maybe the patients with discontinuation after 9 months of DAPT had a lower baseline ischemic risk in comparison to the patients with continuation of DAPT, leading to a higher event rate in this group.Unfortunately, patients with death within 14 days after PCI were excluded from the study to focus on long‐term outcome of DAPT duration. However, as we learned from the AUGUSTUS (Open‐Label, 2×2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban versus Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin versus Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, this early phase after PCI is the crucial key for avoiding severe ischemic complications with DAPT, even in addition to long‐term anticoagulation.9 This led to the recommendation to add DAPT to oral anticoagulation at least for the length of hospital stay or 1 week before changing the regimen to oral anticoagulation plus clopidogrel.7There is an effort to investigate newer regimens with shorter DAPT to reduce the risk of bleeding without increasing the risk of ischemia. For patients with acute coronary syndrome, SMART‐DATE (6‐Month Versus 12‐Month or Longer Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome) revealed an increase in myocardial infarction for patients with 6 months of DAPT in comparison to 12 months. However, this trial was performed in an Asian cohort, and about 80% of all patients received clopidogrel as P2Y12 inhibitor.10 PEGASUS‐TIMI 54 and the DAPT study even revealed benefits on ischemic end points for a prolonged DAPT over 1 year. However, bleeding risk increased as expected.11, 12 Furthermore, short DAPT duration with following ticagrelor monotherapy is an emerging regimen. Two studies with 1 and 3 months of DAPT demonstrated no increased risk for ischemic end point, whereas bleeding rate significantly decreased.13, 14 These successful trials already led to inclusion of such regimens into recent guideline.1, 7One point to consider in any case is that a large proportion of the patients in the study of Kinlay et al was men.8 To date, there are no differentiated recommendations for DAPT duration between men and women. Traditionally, female sex has been considered a risk factor for bleeding. However, the Academic Research Consortium for high bleeding risk published a proposal to identify patients with high bleeding risk undergoing PCI. In this proposal, female sex was not addressed as a risk factor for bleeding.15 The performance of this risk score was confirmed by real‐world data, which showed an increase in access‐site bleeding in female patients but not overall bleeding in a 1‐year follow‐up.16 Nevertheless, female patients are mostly underrepresented in randomized controlled trials, which limits meaningfulness of data for both sexes.Besides traditional antiplatelet agents, the COMPASS trial revealed beneficial effects for a dual pathway inhibition with acetylsalicylic acid and rivaroxaban (2.5 mg 2 times a day) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.5 Subsequently, in patients after PCI, a dual pathway inhibition led to decreased rate of major adverse cardiovascular events, death, and stroke, but not myocardial infarction, and an increased rate of bleeding events.17 The mechanism behind these findings is unclear to date. Beside anti‐inflammatory properties,18 rivaroxaban was also shown to inhibit platelet aggregation, which may contribute further to the risk reduction in COMPASS.19To date, optimal antithrombotic regimens after PCI are not known for a broad range of patients. However, current guidelines allow an individual approach, supporting different regimens and duration of DAPT in dependence of ischemic and bleeding risk. Nevertheless, new trials are urgently needed to improve treatment after PCI, especially for the bleeding risk. Kinlay et al provide important information on the impact of DAPT duration on ischemic and bleeding end points, supporting a short DAPT duration.8DisclosuresNone.Footnotes*Correspondence to: Philipp Mourikis, MD, Heinrich Heine University Medical Center Dusseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, Düsseldorf N/A 40225, Germany. Email: philipp.[email protected]uni-duesseldorf.deSee Article by Kinlay et al.For Disclosures, see page 2.References1 Neumann FJ, Sousa‐Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, Byrne RA, Collet JP, Falk V, Head SJ, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40:87–165. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 Costa F, van Klaveren D, James S, Heg D, Räber L, Feres F, Pilgrim T, Hong MK, Kim HS, Colombo A, et al. Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE‐DAPT) score: a pooled analysis of individual‐patient datasets from clinical trials. Lancet. 2017; 389:1025–1034. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30397-5CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3 Dong L, Lu C, Wensen C, Fuzhong C, Khalid M, Xiaoyu D, Guangjuan L, Yanxia Q, Yufeng Z, Xinjian L, et al. Performance of PRECISE‐DAPT and age‐bleeding‐organ dysfunction score for predicting bleeding complication during dual antiplatelet therapy in Chinese elderly patients. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 9:910805. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.910805CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4 Furtado RH, Nicolau JC, Magnani G, Im K, Bhatt DL, Storey RF, Steg PG, Spinar J, Budaj A, Kontny F, et al. Long‐term ticagrelor for secondary prevention in patients with prior myocardial infarction and no history of coronary stenting: insights from PEGASUS‐TIMI 54. Eur Heart J. 2020; 41:1625–1632. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz821CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Bosch J, Dagenais GR, Hart RG, Shestakovska O, Diaz R, Alings M, Lonn EM, Anand SS, et al. Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377:1319–1330. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709118CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6 Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, Antunes MJ, Bucciarelli‐Ducci C, Bueno H, Caforio ALP, Crea F, Goudevenos JA, Halvorsen S, et al. 2017 ESC guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST‐segment elevation: the task force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST‐segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2018; 39:119–177. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx393CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7 Collet JP, Thiele H, Barbato E, Barthélémy O, Bauersachs J, Bhatt DL, Dendale P, Dorobantu M, Edvardsen T, Folliguet T, et al. 2020 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST‐segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 2021; 42:1289–1367. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa575CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8 Kinlay S, Young MM, Sherrod R, Gagnon DR. Long‐term outcomes and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary intervention with second‐generation drug‐eluting stents: the veterans affairs extended DAPT study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022; 11:e027055. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.122.027055LinkGoogle Scholar9 Lopes RD, Heizer G, Aronson R, Vora AN, Massaro T, Mehran R, Goodman SG, Windecker S, Darius H, Li J, et al. Antithrombotic therapy after acute coronary syndrome or PCI in atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380(16):1509–1524. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa1817083CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10 Hahn JY, Song YB, Oh JH, Cho DK, Lee JB, Doh JH, Kim SH, Jeong JO, Bae JH, Kim BO, et al. 6‐month versus 12‐month or longer dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (SMART‐DATE): a randomised, open‐label, non‐inferiority trial. Lancet. 2018; 391:1274–1284. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30493-8CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11 Bonaca MP, Bhatt DL, Cohen M, Steg PH, Storey RF, Jensen EC, Magnani G, Bansilal S, Fish MP, Im K, et al. Long‐term use of ticagrelor in patients with prior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372:1791–1800. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1500857CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12 Mauri L, Kereiakes DL, Yeh RW, Driscoll‐Shempp P, Cutlip DE, Steg PG, Normand SLT, Braunwald E, Wiviott SD, Cohen DJ, et al. Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug‐eluting stents. N Engl J Med. 2014; 371:2155–2166. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1409312CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13 Vranckx P, Valgimigli M, Jüni P, Hamm C, Steg PG, Heg D, van Es GA, McFadden EP, Onuma Y, van Meijeren C, et al. Ticagrelor plus aspirin for 1 month, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months vs aspirin plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 12 months, followed by aspirin monotherapy for 12 months after implantation of a drug‐eluting stent: a multicentre, open‐label, randomised superiority trial. Lancet. 2018; 392:940–949. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31858-0CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14 Mehran R, Baber U, Sharma SK, Cohen DJ, Angiolillo DJ, Briguori C, Cha JY, Collier T, Dangas G, Dudek D, et al. Ticagrelor with or without aspirin in high‐risk patients after PCI. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381:2032–2042. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908419CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15 Urban P, Mehran R, Colleran R, Angiolillo DJ, Byrne RA, Capodanno D, Cuisset T, Cutlip D, Eerdmans P, Eikelboom J, et al. Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2019; 140:240–261. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.040167LinkGoogle Scholar16 Spirito A, Felice Gragnano F, Corpataux N, Vaisnora L, Galea R, Svab S, Gargiulo G, Siontis GCM, Praz F, Lanz J, et al. Sex‐based differences in bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention and implications for the academic research consortium high bleeding risk criteria. J Am Heart Assoc. 2021; 10:e021965. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021965LinkGoogle Scholar17 Lin Y, Cai Z, Dong S, Liu H, Pang X, Chen Q, Yuan J, Geng Q. Comparative efficacy and safety of antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy in patients with chronic coronary syndromes after percutaneous coronary intervention: a network meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Pharmacol. 2022; 13:992376. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.992376CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18 Li Q, Yang XT, Wei W, Hu XP, Li XX, Xu M. Favorable effect of rivaroxaban against vascular dysfunction in diabetic mice by inhibiting NLRP3 inflammasome activation. J Cell Physiol. 2022; 237:3369–3380. doi: 10.1002/jcp.30807CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19 Petzold T, Thienel M, Dannenberg L, Mourikis P, Helten C, Ayhan A, Pembele RM, Achilles A, Trojovky K, Konsek D, et al. Rivaroxaban reduces arterial thrombosis by inhibition of FXa‐driven platelet activation via protease activated Receptor‐1. Circ Res. 2020; 126:486–500. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.119.315099LinkGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsRelated articlesLong‐Term Outcomes and Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Intervention With Second‐Generation Drug‐Eluting Stents: The Veterans Affairs Extended DAPT StudyScott Kinlay, et al. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2023;12 January 17, 2023Vol 12, Issue 2 Article InformationMetrics Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley BlackwellThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028775PMID: 36645091 Originally publishedJanuary 16, 2023 KeywordsEditorialsplatelet aggregation inhibitorspercutaneous coronary interventionPDF download SubjectsAcute Coronary SyndromesPharmacologyStentThrombosis