Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical Group, McLean, VA (N.C.B.).
Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN (L.M.).
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Apr;13(4):e008349. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008349. Epub 2020 Apr 7.
The REDUAL PCI trial (Evaluation of Dual Therapy With Dabigatran vs Triple Therapy With Warfarin in Patients With AF That Undergo a PCI With Stenting) demonstrated that, in patients with atrial fibrillation following percutaneous coronary intervention, bleeding risk was lower with dabigatran plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor (dual therapy) than warfarin plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor and aspirin (triple therapy). Dual therapy was noninferior for risk of thromboembolic events. Whether these results apply equally to patients at higher risk of ischemic events due to lesion complexity or clinical risk factors is unclear.
The primary end point was time to first major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event. The composite efficacy end point was death, thromboembolic event, or unplanned revascularization. Our prespecified subgroup analysis categorized patients by presence of procedural complexity and/or clinical complexity factors at baseline. A modified dual antiplatelet therapy score categorized patients according to degree of clinical risk.
Of 2725 patients, 43.1% had clinical complexity factors alone, 9.9% procedural factors alone, 10.0% both, and 37.0% neither. Risk of the primary bleeding end point was lower in both dabigatran dual therapy groups than warfarin triple therapy groups, regardless of procedural and/or clinical lesion complexity (interaction values: 0.90 and 0.37, respectively). Importantly, a similar risk of the efficacy end point was observed between dabigatran dual and warfarin triple therapy, regardless of the presence of clinical or procedural complexity factors (interaction values: 0.67 and 0.54, dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy, respectively). Similar benefit was seen for each dose of dabigatran dual therapy for bleeding events regardless of dual antiplatelet therapy score (interaction values: 0.53 and 0.54, respectively), with similar risk of thromboembolic events (interaction values: 0.20 and 0.08, respectively).
In patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, dabigatran 110 and 150 mg dual therapy reduced bleeding risk compared with warfarin triple therapy, with a similar risk of thromboembolic outcomes, irrespective of procedural and/or clinical complexity and modified dual antiplatelet therapy score. Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT02164864.
REDUAL PCI 试验(在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的房颤患者中,评估达比加群与华法林三联治疗与达比加群双联治疗加氯吡格雷或替格瑞洛的疗效比较)表明,在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后的房颤患者中,达比加群加氯吡格雷或替格瑞洛(双联治疗)的出血风险低于华法林加氯吡格雷或替格瑞洛和阿司匹林(三联治疗)。双联治疗在血栓栓塞事件风险方面不劣于三联治疗。由于病变复杂性或临床危险因素,这些结果是否同样适用于缺血事件风险较高的患者尚不清楚。
主要终点是首次大出血或临床相关非大出血事件的时间。复合疗效终点为死亡、血栓栓塞事件或计划性血运重建。我们预先设定的亚组分析根据基线时是否存在手术复杂性和/或临床复杂性因素对患者进行分类。改良双联抗血小板治疗评分根据临床风险程度对患者进行分类。
在 2725 例患者中,43.1%有单纯临床复杂性因素,9.9%有单纯手术复杂性因素,10.0%两者兼有,37.0%两者均无。无论是否存在手术和/或临床病变复杂性,达比加群双联治疗组的主要出血终点风险均低于华法林三联治疗组(交互 值:0.90 和 0.37)。重要的是,达比加群双联治疗与华法林三联治疗的疗效终点风险相似,无论是否存在临床或手术复杂性因素(交互 值:0.67 和 0.54,达比加群 110 和 150 mg 双联治疗)。对于出血事件,达比加群双联治疗的每种剂量均能获得相似的益处,无论双联抗血小板治疗评分如何(交互 值:0.53 和 0.54),血栓栓塞事件的风险相似(交互 值:0.20 和 0.08)。
在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的房颤患者中,与华法林三联治疗相比,达比加群 110 和 150 mg 双联治疗可降低出血风险,且血栓栓塞结局风险相似,无论手术和/或临床复杂性以及改良双联抗血小板治疗评分如何。