Yufeng Yan, Haimei Xu, Yingying Zhao, Song Lin, Yaguo Zheng
{"title":"Comparison of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in primary percutaneous coronary intervention patients: a single-center retrospective study.","authors":"Yufeng Yan, Haimei Xu, Yingying Zhao, Song Lin, Yaguo Zheng","doi":"10.1097/MCA.0000000000001506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is uncertain whether ticagrelor is more effective and safer than clopidogrel in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients in the East Asian population in the real world. This study compared the clinical outcomes of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively enrolled 1124 patients diagnosed with STEMI in Nanjing First Hospital from July 2011 to April 2019. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline covariates between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3-5 bleeding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 1124 STEMI patients in the analysis. After propensity score matching, 420 patients were included in each group. There was a lower incidence of all-cause death in the ticagrelor group when compared with the clopidogrel group during the follow-up (8.3 vs. 17.1%; hazard ratio: 0.481; P < 0.001). Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, and stent thrombosis. However, no difference was detected in major bleeding. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age, Killip classification, creatinine, low-density lipoprotein, left ventricular ejection fraction, single vessel disease, inhospital intra-aortic balloon pump implantation, β-blockers, and ticagrelor were independent predictive parameters of all-cause death.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor reduced all-cause death but did not increase the incidence of major bleeding in primary PCI patients. Therefore, ticagrelor may be considered a viable substitute for clopidogrel.</p>","PeriodicalId":10702,"journal":{"name":"Coronary artery disease","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coronary artery disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCA.0000000000001506","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: It is uncertain whether ticagrelor is more effective and safer than clopidogrel in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients in the East Asian population in the real world. This study compared the clinical outcomes of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 1124 patients diagnosed with STEMI in Nanjing First Hospital from July 2011 to April 2019. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline covariates between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause death, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3-5 bleeding.
Results: We enrolled 1124 STEMI patients in the analysis. After propensity score matching, 420 patients were included in each group. There was a lower incidence of all-cause death in the ticagrelor group when compared with the clopidogrel group during the follow-up (8.3 vs. 17.1%; hazard ratio: 0.481; P < 0.001). Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death, and stent thrombosis. However, no difference was detected in major bleeding. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age, Killip classification, creatinine, low-density lipoprotein, left ventricular ejection fraction, single vessel disease, inhospital intra-aortic balloon pump implantation, β-blockers, and ticagrelor were independent predictive parameters of all-cause death.
Conclusion: Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor reduced all-cause death but did not increase the incidence of major bleeding in primary PCI patients. Therefore, ticagrelor may be considered a viable substitute for clopidogrel.
背景:在现实世界中,替格瑞洛在东亚人群st段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者中是否比氯吡格雷更有效、更安全尚不确定。这项研究比较了替格瑞洛和氯吡格雷在STEMI患者接受初级经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的临床结果。方法:我们回顾性纳入2011年7月至2019年4月在南京第一医院诊断为STEMI的1124例患者。倾向评分匹配用于平衡替格瑞洛组和氯吡格雷组之间的基线协变量。主要疗效终点为全因死亡,主要安全终点为大出血,定义为出血学术研究联盟3-5型出血。结果:我们纳入了1124例STEMI患者。倾向评分匹配后,每组纳入420例患者。在随访期间,替格瑞洛组的全因死亡发生率低于氯吡格雷组(8.3 vs 17.1%;风险比:0.481;P < 0.001)。替格瑞洛还可降低心肌梗死、心血管死亡和支架血栓形成。然而,在大出血方面没有发现差异。多因素Cox回归分析显示,年龄、Killip分类、肌酐、低密度脂蛋白、左室射血分数、单血管疾病、住院主动脉内球囊泵植入、β受体阻滞剂和替格瑞洛是全因死亡的独立预测参数。结论:与氯吡格雷相比,替格瑞洛降低了原发性PCI患者的全因死亡率,但未增加大出血的发生率。因此,替格瑞洛可能被认为是氯吡格雷的可行替代品。
期刊介绍:
Coronary Artery Disease welcomes reports of original research with a clinical emphasis, including observational studies, clinical trials, translational research, novel imaging, pharmacology and interventional approaches as well as advances in laboratory research that contribute to the understanding of coronary artery disease. Each issue of Coronary Artery Disease is divided into four areas of focus: Original Research articles, Review in Depth articles by leading experts in the field, Editorials and Images in Coronary Artery Disease. The Editorials will comment on selected original research published in each issue of Coronary Artery Disease, as well as highlight controversies in coronary artery disease understanding and management.
Submitted artcles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool.