Institute of Cardiovascular Medicine and Science, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
EuroIntervention. 2018 Mar 20;13(16):1931-1938. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00408.
The HEAT-PPCI trial compared bivalirudin and unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). The aim of this study was to report pre-specified, secondary analyses comparing the effects of P2Y12 inhibiting agents on platelet reactivity and clinical events.
All patients received preprocedural oral antiplatelet therapy. During the early stages of the trial, the P2Y12 inhibitor of choice was prasugrel with some use of clopidogrel. Later, routine therapy switched to ticagrelor. For cases performed during working hours, multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA) was used to assess ADP-induced platelet aggregation at the end of the index procedure. The effect of P2Y12 inhibitors on the primary efficacy (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]) and safety (major bleeding) outcomes was assessed in all patients. Multiple logistic regression was used to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics. With MEA data from 469 patients, prasugrel therapy resulted in significantly greater suppression of ADP-induced platelet aggregation at 40 U (23, 78) (median; interquartile range [IQR]) when compared against ticagrelor 75 U (41, 100.75); p<0.001 or clopidogrel 79 U (56, 96); p<0.001. In the entire study population (N=1,803), prasugrel therapy was associated with significantly fewer MACE (26/497; 5.2%) in comparison to ticagrelor (83/1,123; 7.4%) or clopidogrel (18/183; 9.8%); odds ratio (OR) 0.64, confidence interval (CI): 0.41-0.99, p=0.045. For major bleeding, there were no significant differences among the three groups - clopidogrel (3/183; 1.6%), prasugrel (13/497; 2.6%) and ticagrelor (43/1,123; 3.8%); OR 0.73, CI: 0.39-1.35, p=0.31. Patients treated with clopidogrel had more high-risk features and clopidogrel use was more common as an alternative to prasugrel. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in the rates of MACE (OR 0.70, CI: 0.41-1.21, p=0.20) or major bleeding (OR 0.80, CI: 0.41-1.60, p=0.53).
In HEAT-PPCI, patients who received prasugrel (rather than clopidogrel or ticagrelor) had significantly greater suppression of ADP-induced platelet aggregation at the end of the procedure. After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, there were no significant differences in ischaemic or bleeding outcomes among the antiplatelet therapies.
HEAT-PPCI 试验比较了接受直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PPCI)的患者使用比伐卢定和普通肝素的效果。本研究旨在报告预先设定的次要分析结果,比较 P2Y12 抑制剂对血小板反应性和临床事件的影响。
所有患者均接受了术前口服抗血小板治疗。在试验的早期阶段,P2Y12 抑制剂的首选药物是普拉格雷,同时也使用了氯吡格雷。后来,常规治疗方案切换为替格瑞洛。对于在工作时间内进行的病例,使用多电极聚集仪(MEA)在指数操作结束时评估 ADP 诱导的血小板聚集。在所有患者中评估了 P2Y12 抑制剂对主要不良心脏事件(MACE)和安全性(大出血)的影响。使用多变量逻辑回归调整基线特征的差异。根据 469 例患者的 MEA 数据,与替格瑞洛 75 U(41,100.75)相比,普拉格雷治疗在 40 U(23,78)时(中位数;四分位距[IQR])显著抑制 ADP 诱导的血小板聚集,差异具有统计学意义(p<0.001)或氯吡格雷 79 U(56,96);p<0.001。在整个研究人群(N=1803)中,与替格瑞洛(83/1123;7.4%)或氯吡格雷(18/183;9.8%)相比,普拉格雷治疗与显著较少的 MACE(26/497;5.2%)相关,比值比(OR)为 0.64,置信区间(CI)为 0.41-0.99,p=0.045。对于大出血,三组之间没有显著差异-氯吡格雷(3/183;1.6%)、普拉格雷(13/497;2.6%)和替格瑞洛(43/1123;3.8%);OR 0.73,CI:0.39-1.35,p=0.31。接受氯吡格雷治疗的患者具有更多的高危特征,并且氯吡格雷的使用更常见作为普拉格雷的替代药物。调整后,MACE(OR 0.70,CI:0.41-1.21,p=0.20)或大出血(OR 0.80,CI:0.41-1.60,p=0.53)的发生率无显著差异。
在 HEAT-PPCI 中,接受普拉格雷(而非氯吡格雷或替格瑞洛)治疗的患者在操作结束时 ADP 诱导的血小板聚集抑制程度显著更大。在调整了基线特征的差异后,三种抗血小板治疗方案之间的缺血或出血结局没有显著差异。