image dons

je fais un don

High on-treatment Platelet Reactivity as a Risk Factor for Secondary Prevention After Coronary Stent Revascularization : A Landmark Analysis of the ARCTIC Study

Remerciements de Mme COLLET et famille
Aux collègues, amis et patients...

La Grande Journée du Coeur (jeudi 27 juin 2024) : un programme prestigieux dans un lieu exceptionnel !
Pour en savoir plus, veuillez cliquer ici.

Colloquium "Rythme et conduction" (23 avril 2024)
Vidéos des présentations bientôt en ligne !

High on-treatment Platelet Reactivity as a Risk Factor for Secondary Prevention After Coronary Stent Revascularization : A Landmark Analysis of the ARCTIC Study

Publié dans Circulation, le 27 may 2014.

En savoir plus en consultant le site.

Auteurs : Montalescot G, Rangé G, Silvain J, Bonnet JL, Boueri Z, Barthélémy O, Cayla G, Belle L, Van Belle E, Cuisset T, Elhadad S, Pouillot C, Henry P, Motreff P, Carrié D, Rousseau H, Aubry P, Monségu J, Sabouret P, O’Connor SA, Abtan J, Kerneis M, Saint Etienne C, Beygui F, Vicaut E, Collet JP

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Individualizing antiplatelet therapy after platelet function testing did not improve outcome after coronary stenting in the Assessment by a Double Randomization of a Conventional Antiplatelet Strategy Versus a Monitoring-Guided Strategy for Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation and of Treatment Interruption Versus Continuation One Year After Stenting (ARCTIC) study. Whether results are different during the phase of secondary prevention starting after hospital discharge, when periprocedural events have been excluded, is unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS:

In ARCTIC, 2440 patients were randomized before coronary stenting to a strategy of platelet function monitoring (VerifyNow P2Y12/aspirin point-of-care assay) with drug adjustment in suboptimal responders to antiplatelet therapy or to a conventional strategy without monitoring and without drug or dose changes. We performed a landmark analysis starting at the time of hospital discharge evaluating the primary end point of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization through 1 year. After discharge, the primary end point occurred in 8.6% of patients in the monitoring arm and 7.9% in the conventional arm (hazard ratio, 1.105; 95% confidence interval, 0.835-1.461; P=0.48). Stent thrombosis or urgent revascularization occurred in 4.4% and 4.5% in the monitoring and conventional arms, respectively (P=0.99). There was no difference for any of the other ischemic end points. Major bleeding event rates were 1.8% in the monitoring arm and 2.8% in the conventional arm (P=0.11), whereas major or minor bleeding event rates were 2.3% and 3.4%, respectively (P=0.10).

CONCLUSIONS:

Detection of platelet hyper-reactivity by platelet function testing in patients undergoing coronary stenting with further therapeutic adjustment does not reduce ischemic recurrences after intervention. On-treatment platelet hyperreactivity cannot be considered as a risk factor requiring intervention for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary revascularization.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL:

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00827411.

Autres actualités

+

01/10/2023


Rationale and design of the ARAMIS trial: Anakinra versus pl...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Oct;116(10):460-466
+

01/09/2023


Comparison of three echo-guidance techniques in percutaneous...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Sep 29:S1875-2136(23)00171-7