不同剂量西洛他唑强化抗血小板对冠脉支架术后血小板高反应性的影响

目的：观察临床应用不同方案强化抗血小板治疗改善冠脉支架术后血小板高反应性的可行性、安全性及有效性。方法：选择2009年3月至2011年2月在沈阳军区总医院、中国医科大学第一附属医院、解放军第463医共入选560例冠脉支架术后血小板高反应性（HPR Highon-treatment Platelet Reactivity）患者,在给予阿司匹林300mg／天,氯吡格雷150mg／天,3天后HPR仍未缓解者,随机分为两组,一组在强化抗血小板治疗即阿司匹林300mg,氯吡格雷150mg的基础上加用小剂量西洛他唑（50mg,2／日）,另一组在标准两联方案即阿司匹林300mg,氯吡格雷75mg的基础上加用西洛他唑100mg,2／日,3天后测定HPR的缓解情况。结果：大剂量氯吡格雷治疗3天后HRP的缓解卒为54-3％（304／560）,接受不同西洛他唑剂量治疗3天后又有58．6％的患者HPR缓解,但是西洛他唑50mg组和100mg组HRP缓解率无差别（59．4％VS57．8％,P=0．80）。两组患者30天随访均无死亡及卒中事件,无主要及次要出血事件。结论：强化抗血小板治疗可改善冠脉支架术后的血小板高反应性且未增加出血风险,但其临床获益还需更长时间的随访结果进一步明确,两种强化抗血小板治疗方案对改善冠脉支架术后HPR的作用相似。     

Percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunctive abciximab and clopidogrel in a patient with chronic idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura

The use of the antiplatelet agents abciximab and clopidogrel is now accepted therapy in percutaneous coronary intervention. We present a case in which these agents were used in a patient with idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura and a platelet count of 40x10(9)/l undergoing primary multivessel coronary stenting. This case shows that unstable coronary syndromes can occur in patients with thrombocytopaenia and that antiplatelet agents may be used safely in this context.     

Early double stent thrombosis associated with clopidogrel hyporesponsivenesss

A 57-year-old male patient without cardiovascular history suffered an acute myocardial infarction and underwent drug-eluting stent implantation in the left anterior descending artery. A few days later, the right coronary artery was also stented (drug-eluting stent). Three days later, he was re-admitted to our hospital in cardiogenic shock. Emergent coronary angiography showed total occlusion of both stents. Platelet function analysis (PFA) showed attenuated platelet inhibition in response to clopidogrel treatment. The patient was the carrier of a loss-of-function polymorphism in the CYP2C19 gene, which has been associated with increased incidence of adverse thrombotic events. Antiplatelet therapy was switched to prasugrel and PFA revealed an adequate antiplatelet effect.     

Drug-eluting stents in the treatment of proximal vertebral artery stenosis

The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of endovascular revascularization treatment using drug-eluting stents in patients with atherosclerotic proximal vertebral artery (VA) stenosis. Thirty-two patients (61 ± 10 years old) were implanted with 35 sirolimus and tacrolimus eluting stents (3 patients had them from two sides). 27 patients (84%) had vertebrobasilar symptoms at enrollment. All patients were pretreated with dual antiplatelet therapy. The intervention was technically successful in 89% cases. No stroke, myocardial infarction, or death occurred in perioperative period. On duplex scanning the stents remained completely functional. In the late postoperative period 29 (91%) patients, with 32 implanted stents were followed- up. The mean follow-up was 9.5 months. No stroke occurred in patients during this period. Recurrence of vertebrobasilar insufficiency symptoms was noted in 3 patients. VA renarrowing was detected in 16 (50%) arteries in 15 patients, and 12 (80%) of them were asymptomatic. Restenosis ≥50% (n = 13) and reocclusion (n = 3) were more frequent in those with implantation of tacrolimus eluting stents compared to those with sirolimus eluting stents: 10 (71%) of 14 observations to 6 (33%) of 18 cases (p = 0.1794), respectively. Stent fracture was observed in 2 cases (6%), followed by restenosis. Restenosis rate prevailed in men (p = 0.0173). Thus, stenting of VA extracranial portion is reasonably safe procedure with a good clinical effect. The use of drug-eluting stents looks promising but does not solve the problem of high restenosis rate in the late postoperative period.     

Efficacy and Safety of Adding Clopidogrel to Aspirin on Stroke Prevention among High Vascular Risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objectives

Whether clopidogrel should be added to aspirin for stroke prevention remained controversial for the risk of hemorrhagic complications. This meta-analysis was aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding clopidogrel to aspirin on stroke prevention in high vascular risk patients, and to provide evidence for a suitable duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBase, OVID and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to June, 2013) for randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin versus aspirin alone in high vascular risk patients. Comparisons of stroke and hemorrhagic complications between treatment groups were expressed by the pooled Relative Risks (RRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs).

Results

Fifteen trials with a total of 97692 intention-to-treat participants were included with duration of follow-up ranging from 7 days to 3.6 years. Dual antiplatelet therapy reduced all stroke by 21% (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.73–0.85) with no evidence of heterogeneity across the trials (P = 0.27, I ² = 17%).The effects were consistent between short-term subgroup (≤1 month, RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.67–0.85) and long-term subgroup (≥3 months, RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.73–0.89). The risk of major bleeding was not significantly increased by dual antiplatelet therapy in short-term subgroup (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.91–1.36), while significantly increased in long-term subgroup (RR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.36–1.69). Long-term dual antiplatelet therapy substantially increased the risk of intracranial bleeding (RR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.22–2.54).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrates that short-term combination of clopidogrel and aspirin is effective and safe for stroke prevention in high vascular risk patients. Long-term combination therapy substantially increases the risk of major bleeding and intracranial bleeding.     

Stent thrombosis in real-world patients: a comparison of drug-eluting with bare metal stents

BackgroundAlthough the introduction of drugeluting stents (DES) has been associated with an impressive reduction in target vessel revascularisation, there has been concern about the safety profile. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of stent thrombosis in real-world patients and evaluate the contribution of drug-eluting stents. Methods A prospective observational cohort study was conducted at a high-volume centre in Utrecht, the Netherlands. All patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between 1 January and 31 December 2005 were evaluated. The patients were pretreated with aspirin and clopidogrel, which was continued for six months in bare metal stents (BMS) and 12 months in DES. ResultsIn 2005, 1309 patients underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention procedure with stent implantation. After a median follow-up of nine months, 1.8% (n=23) of the patients had suffered from stent thrombosis. Two cases could be attributed to incorrect use of antiplatelet agents. In 8/23 cases, a technical reason was found such as an unrecognised dissection or stent underexpansion. The timing of stent thrombosis was acute in 1/23 patients, subacute in 20/23 patients and late in 2/23 patients. In both cases of late stent thrombosis, a BMS had been used. There were no differences in stent thrombosis rates between DES and BMS (1.4 vs. 1.9%, ns.). This is remarkable since DES were used in more complex and longer lesions. ConclusionThe use of DES in routine daily practice does not appear to be associated with a higher rate of stent thrombosis than BMS. (Neth Heart J 2007;15:382-6).     

Clinical Presentations,Antiplatelet Strategies and Prognosis of Patients with Stent Thrombosis: An Observational Study of 140 Patients

Background

Until now there has been scarce evidence regarding an optimal antiplatelet strategy and clinical outcomes for patients who had suffered from stent thrombosis (ST).

Methods and Results

140 patients who suffered from stent thrombosis were prospectively registered. Patients received dual (aspirin and 150 mg clopidogrel, N = 66) or triple (additional cilostazol, N = 74) antiplatelet therapy at the physician’s discretion. Thereafter platelet reactivity and one year clinical outcomes were analyzed. The primary outcome included the composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke at one year,which developed in 41 (29.3%) patients, consisting of 31 (22.1%) cardiac death, 9 (6.4%) non-fatal MI and 1 (1.4%) stroke. Recurrent definite and probable ST according to ARC definition was observed in 8 (5.7%) and 14 (10.0%) patients, respectively. Triple therapy was associated with significantly lower platelet reactivities (50.2±17.8, % vs. 59.6±17.2, %, P = 0.002) compared to high dose dual antiplatelet therapy. However, the incidence of primary events (24.3% vs. 34.8%, P = 0.172) did not differ between triple and dual antiplatelet therapies. High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HR: 8.35, 95% CI: 2.234∼30.867, P = 0.002) and diabetes (HR: 3.732, 95% CI: 1.353∼10.298, P = 0.011) were independent predictors of primary events.

Conclusions

Patients who suffered from stent thrombosis have a poor prognosis even after revascularization with intensive antiplatelet therapy. Triple antiplatelet therapy was more effective in reducing on-treatment platelet reactivity, compared to high dose dual antiplatelet therapy.     

Safety of Low-Dose Aspirin in Endovascular Treatment for Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis

Objectives

To evaluate the safety of low-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel versus high-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel in prevention of vascular risk within 90 days of duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients treated with intracranial endovascular treatment.

Methods

From January 2012 to December 2013, this prospective and observational study enrolled 370 patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis of ≥70% with poor collateral undergoing intracranial endovascular treatment. Antiplatelet therapy consists of aspirin, at a low-dose of 100 mg or high-dose of 300 mg daily; clopidogrel, at a dose of 75 mg daily for 5 days before endovascular treatment. The dual antiplatelet therapy continued for 90 days after intervention. The study endpoints include acute thrombosis, subacute thrombosis, stroke or death within 90 days after intervention.

Results

Two hundred and seventy three patients received low-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel and 97 patients received high-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel before intracranial endovascular treatment. Within 90 days after intervention, there were 4 patients (1.5%) with acute thrombosis, 5 patients (1.8%) with subacute thrombosis, 17 patients (6.2%) with stroke, and 2 death (0.7%) in low-dose aspirin group, compared with no patient (0%) with acute thrombosis, 2 patient (2.1%) with subacute thrombosis, 6 patients (6.2%) with stroke, and 2 death (2.1%) in high-dose aspirin group, and there were no significant difference in all study endpoints between two groups.

Conclusion

Low-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel is comparative in safety with high-dose aspirin plus clopidogrel within 90 days of duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients treated with intracranial endovascular treatment.     

Risk of bleeding associated with combined use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and antiplatelet therapy following acute myocardial infarction

Background:

Patients prescribed antiplatelet treatment to prevent recurrent acute myocardial infarction are often also given a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) to treat coexisting depression. Use of either treatment may increase the risk of bleeding. We assessed the risk of bleeding among patients taking both medications following acute myocardial infarction.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using hospital discharge abstracts, physician billing information, medication reimbursement claims and demographic data from provincial health services administrative databases. We included patients 50 years of age or older who were discharged from hospital with antiplatelet therapy following acute myocardial infarction between January 1998 and March 2007. Patients were followed until admission to hospital due to a bleeding episode, admission to hospital due to recurrent acute myocardial infarction, death or the end of the study period.

Results:

The 27 058 patients in the cohort received the following medications at discharge: acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) (n = 14 426); clopidogrel (n = 2467), ASA and clopidogrel (n = 9475); ASA and an SSRI (n = 406); ASA, clopidogrel and an SSRI (n = 239); or clopidogrel and an SSRI (n = 45). Compared with ASA use alone, the combined use of an SSRI with antiplatelet therapy was associated with an increased risk of bleeding (ASA and SSRI: hazard ratio [HR] 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08–1.87; ASA, clopidogrel and SSRI: HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.61–3.42). Compared with dual antiplatelet therapy alone (ASA and clopidogrel), combined use of an SSRI and dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with an increased risk of bleeding (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.07–2.32).

Interpretation:

Patients taking an SSRI together with ASA or dual antiplatelet therapy following acute myocardial infarction were at increased risk of bleeding.Antiplatelet agents such as acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and clopidogrel are a mainstay of therapy following acute myocardial infarction. These agents are effective in reducing the risk of recurrent acute myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular events, with the potential for additive benefit when used in combination.^1–3 The risk of bleeding associated with their use, however, is of concern.^4–6 This risk may be increased further by the frequent concomitant use of other medications associated with an increased risk of bleeding, such as anticoagulant therapy⁷ and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).Up to 20% of patients with cardiovascular disease experience depression and are most often prescribed an SSRI.^8–13 The vast majority of these patients also use antiplatelet therapy. The risk of bleeding associated with combining SSRI therapy with single or dual antiplatelet therapy is uncertain. Two large clinical trials that examined SSRI use following acute myocardial infarction did not specifically report on the risk of bleeding,^14,15 and earlier studies suggested no increase in risk associated with SSRI therapy combined with single-agent antiplatelet therapy.^16,17SSRI use itself has been associated with an increased risk of bleeding, particularly during the first month of use.¹⁸ The inhibition of serotonin transporters by SSRIs is thought to be responsible for the risk of bleeding.¹⁹ Platelets release serotonin at sites of bleeding and vascular damage; however, they do not synthesize serotonin and instead acquire it from the blood and store it.^19,20 By this mechanism, SSRIs may also worsen the bleeding caused by ASA and clopidogrel.^19,20 Inhibition of cytochrome P450 by certain SSRIs has also been associated with increased risk of drug interaction causing bleeding;²¹ however, data on this issue are scarce.We examined the risk of bleeding associated with the use of SSRIs when combined with single and dual antiplatelet therapy among patients following acute myocardial infarction.     

Point-of-care platelet function testing in patients undergoing PCI: between a rock and a hard place

Since recent studies have linked an impaired response to antiplatelet therapy with a higher incidence of atherothrombotic events, the monitoring of the efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in the individual patient has attracted much attention. In the present report, we demonstrate that platelet function testing with several point-of-care assays results in ambiguous and conflicting results: some assays indicated that the patient’s platelets were insufficiently inhibited by clopidogrel whereas other assays reported an adequate response. Therefore, platelet function assays should not be used solely to guide treatment decisions, and tailor-made antithrombotic treatment has to wait for the most predictive platelet function test to emerge for measuring the risk for thrombotic complications after stenting. Until then, daily clinical practice should not be guided by point-of-care platelet function testing. (Neth Heart J 2007;15:299-305).     

Perioperative management of antiplatelet treatment in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting in Dutch cardiothoracic centres

Background

International guidelines do not provide uniform recommendations regarding the use of antiplatelet treatment in the perioperative period in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Methods

A questionnaire was sent to all 16 cardiothoracic centres in the Netherlands to determine which antiplatelet treatment is used in the perioperative setting. Furthermore, a single-centre prospective observational cohort study was performed which included all patients undergoing isolated CABG in July 2014.

Results

Eleven centres responded to the survey. Acetylsalicylic acid monotherapy was discontinued before surgery in 6 centres. In patients with an acute coronary syndrome receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), most centres discontinued the P2Y₁₂ inhibitor preoperatively. DAPT was restarted after surgery in 4 centres. However, 6 centres continued DAPT in patients who had undergone coronary stenting within one month of surgery. In patients with coronary stents, variation in the management of antiplatelet therapy increased in proportion to the interval between stenting and surgery. A total of 70 patients were included in the registry. Acetylsalicylic acid monotherapy was discontinued in 51% of patients and restarted in all patients. P2Y₁₂ inhibitor treatment was discontinued before surgery in 70% of patients and re-initiated after CABG in 29%.

Conclusions

Major differences were observed in the preoperative and postoperative management of antiplatelet treatment between different Dutch cardiothoracic centres and within a single centre. Part of this variation is probably due to lack of evidence and differences between the current guidelines; however, many of the strategies were not in accordance with any of these guidelines.

     

Antiplatelet therapy in secondary stroke prevention – state of the art

Our objective is to provide the reader with an overview as well as an update on current antiplatelet therapy for secondary stroke prevention. Relevant journals were hand-searched by the authors to compile a broad but by far not comprehensive summary of innovative and clinically relevant studies. Aspirin, clopidogrel and the combination of dipyridamole plus aspirin are the cornerstone therapy in secondary prevention after non-cardio-embolic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. A head-to-head comparison showed no difference in the prevention of recurrent stroke between dipyridamole plus aspirin and clopidogrel. More potent antiplatelet drugs or the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel prevent more ischaemic events, but also lead to more bleeding complications. For secondary stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation is more effective than aspirin or the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel.     

瑞舒伐他汀和阿托伐他汀在急性冠脉综合症中对氯吡格雷抗血 小板活性的对比研究

目的：在急性冠脉综合征( acute coronary syndromes, ACS )的治疗中,抗血小板治疗及调脂治疗是最基础的治疗方案。近来 有学者提出,氯吡格雷和他汀类药物都经过细胞色素CYP 3A4 途径代谢,二者因存在竞争性抑制,有可能降低氯吡格雷抗血小板 的活性。本试验将针对阿托伐他汀及瑞舒伐他汀进行研究。方法：选择急性冠脉综合症的患者42 例,所有患者均接受氯吡格雷治 疗（负荷剂量300 mg,维持剂量75 mg/d）。随机分配为A、B 两组,A 组（n=20）服用阿托伐他汀治疗（20 mg/d）,B 组（n=22 服用瑞 舒伐他汀治疗（10 mg/d）。分别于氯吡格雷服用前、服药治疗后3 天、服药治疗后7 天后采静脉血送检,测定ADP（10 滋mol/L）诱导 的血小板聚集率。结果：阿托伐他汀组（A 组）及瑞舒伐他汀组（B 组）相比,服用氯吡格雷前ADP 诱导的血小板聚集率基线值无 统计学差异。服用氯吡格雷3 日及7 日后,ADP诱导的血小板聚集率明显降低,(3.85± 2.58)vs(3.09± 2.27),(0.65± 0.88)vs(1.05± 0.95),P>0.05,无明显统计学差异。结论：氯吡格雷的确可以降低血小板的活性。同时,短期之内氯吡格雷的抗血小板活性未受到 他汀类的影响,包括经过CPY3A4途径的他汀,如阿托伐他汀。     

Effects of Clopidogrel and Proton Pump Inhibitors on Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus after Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Objective

To investigate whether there is an increased risk of cardiac events in diabetic patients with a combined therapy of clopidogrel (CLO) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) after drug-eluting stent (DES) deployment.

Methods

By using National Health Insurance Research Database, all patients who received CLO with or without PPI therapy within 90 days after undergoing DES (limus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting stents) deployment were enrolled. Endpoints were acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and readmission for revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery) after 3, 6, and 12 months.

Results

A total of 6,603 diabetic patients received LESs (5,933 in the CLO subgroup and 670 in the CLO plus PPIs subgroup), and 3,202 patients received PESs (2,923 in the CLO subgroup and 279 in the CLO plus PPIs subgroup). The patients who received CLO plus PPIs were at higher risk of ACS than those receiving CLO within 1 year after DES deployment (LESs: 6-month hazard ratio [HR] = 1.63, and 1-year HR = 1.37; PESs: 3-month HR = 1.72). Patients with a history of ACS who received CLO plus PPIs were at higher risk of ACS after LES implantation (HR = 1.55) than those in the CLO group.

Conclusion

In “real-world” diabetic patients with LES deployment, the combination of PPIs and CLO is associated with higher rates of ACS after 6 months and 1 year. Even after correction for confounding factors, concomitant PPI use remained an independent predictor of cardiac events, emphasizing the clinical importance of this drug—drug interaction.     

High Current CD4+ T Cell Count Predicts Suboptimal Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy

High levels of adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) are necessary for achieving and maintaining optimal virological suppression, as suboptimal adherence leads to therapy failure and disease progression. It is well known that adherence to ART predicts therapy response, but it is unclear whether clinical outcomes of ART predict adherence. To examine the predictive power of current CD4⁺ T cell count for adherence of HIV-infected individuals to ART, we performed a cross-sectional analysis of 133 Dutch HIV patients with electronically measured adherence. In a multivariate analysis adjusting for a number of sociodemographic and clinical variables, high current CD4⁺ T cell count (>660 cells/mm³) was most strongly associated with lower adherence to ART (assessed as a continuous variable) during a two-month period immediately following the measurements of variables (P = 0.008). The twice-per-day (versus once-per-day) dosing regimen was also significantly associated with lower adherence (P = 0.014). In a second multivariate analysis aimed at determining the predictors of suboptimal (<100% of the doses taken) adherence, high current CD4⁺ T cell count was again the strongest independent predictor of suboptimal adherence to ART (P = 0.015), and the twice-per-day dosing regimen remained associated with suboptimal adherence (P = 0.025). The association between suboptimal adherence and virological suppression was significant in patients with high CD4⁺ T cell counts, but not in patients with low or intermediate CD4⁺ T cell counts (P = 0.036 and P = 0.52, respectively; P = 0.047 for comparison of the effects of adherence on virological suppression between patients with high vs. low or intermediate CD4⁺ T cell counts), suggesting that apart from promoting suboptimal adherence, high CD4⁺ T cell count also strengthens the effect of adherence on virological suppression. Therefore, sustained efforts to emphasize continued adherence are necessary, especially for patients with high CD4⁺ T cell counts.     

Optimal antithrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: triple therapy is too much!

Patients with atrial fibrillation who undergo a coronary intervention are eligible for both anticoagulation and (dual) antiplatelet therapy ((D)APT). An optimal balance has to be found to reduce the thromboembolic risk (i.e. stroke, systemic embolism and myocardial infarction) and to minimise the increased risk of bleeding with concomitant use of an anticoagulant and (D)APT. Owing to a lack of evidence, the guideline recommendations are predominantly based on expert opinion. Current evidence indicates that the combination of a non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant (NOAC) and clopidogrel is safer than vitamin-K oral antagonists plus DAPT, which increases the risk of bleeding, without clear advantages in regard to efficacy. Concerning whether (N)OACs should be combined with single APT rather than DAPT, the findings of the WOEST, PIONEER AF-PCI and RE-DUAL PCI trials seem to favour a combination with clopidogrel only, thus omitting aspirin. Choosing the optimal treatment strategies for individual patients on NOACs and (D)APT will remain a challenge for clinicians, though triple therapy seems to be the less favourable option owing to the increased risk of bleeding.     

瑞舒伐他汀和阿托伐他汀在急性冠脉综合症中对氯吡格雷抗血小板活性的对比研究

目的：在急性冠脉综合征（acute coronary syndromes,ACS）的治疗中,抗血小板治疗及调脂治疗是最基础的治疗方案。近来有学者提出,氯吡格雷和他汀类药物都经过细胞色素CYP3A4途径代谢,二者因存在竞争性抑制,有可能降低氯吡格雷抗血小板的活性。本试验将针对阿托伐他汀及瑞舒伐他汀进行研究。方法：选择急性冠脉综合症的患者42例,所有患者均接受氯吡格雷治疗（负荷剂量300mg,维持剂量75mg／d）。随机分配为A、B两组,A组（n=20）服用阿托伐他汀治疗（20mg／d）,B组（n=22服用瑞舒伐他汀治疗（10mg／d）。分别于氯吡格雷服用前、服药治疗后3天、服药治疗后7天后采静脉血送检,测定ADP（10μmol／L）诱导的血小板聚集率。结果：阿托伐他汀组（A组）及瑞舒伐他汀组（B组）相比,服用氯吡格雷前ADP诱导的血小板聚集率基线值无统计学差异。服用氯吡格雷3日及7日后,ADP诱导的血小板聚集率明显降低,（3．85±2．58）vs（3．09±2．27）,（0．65±0．88）vs（1．05±0．95）,P〉0．05,无明显统计学差异。结论：氯吡格雷的确可以降低血小板的活性。同时,短期之内氯吡格雷的抗血小板活性未受到他汀类的影响。包括经过CPY3A4途径的他汀,如阿托伐他汀。     

A randomised controlled trial of triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole) in the secondary prevention of stroke: safety, tolerability and feasibility

Background

Aspirin, dipyridamole and clopidogrel are effective in secondary vascular prevention. Combination therapy with three antiplatelet agents might maximise the benefit of antiplatelet treatment in the secondary prevention of ischaemic stroke.

Methodology/Principal Findings

A randomised, parallel group, observer-blinded phase II trial compared the combination of aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole with aspirin alone. Adult patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) within 5 years were included. The primary outcome was tolerability to treatment assessed as the number of patients completing randomised treatment. Recruitment was halted prematurely after publication of the ESPRIT trial (which confirmed that combined aspirin and dipyridamole is more effective than aspirin alone). 17 patients were enrolled: male 12 (71%), mean age 62 (SD 13) years, lacunar stroke syndrome 12 (71%), median stroke/TIA onset to randomisation 8 months. Treatment was discontinued in 4 of 9 (44%) patients receiving triple therapy vs. none of 8 taking aspirin (p = 0.08). One recurrent stroke occurred in a patient in the triple group who was noncompliant of all antiplatelet medications. The number of patients with adverse events and bleeding complications, and their severity, were significantly greater in the triple therapy group (p<0.01).

Conclusions/Significance

Long term triple antiplatelet therapy was asociated with a significant increase in adverse events and bleeding rates, and their severity, and a trend to increased discontinuations. However, the patients had a low risk of recurrence and future trials should focus on short term therapy in high risk patients characterised by a very recent event or failure of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Trial Registration

Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN83673558     

Long-term results of implantation of bioengineered and drug-eluting stents in patients with coronary heart disease: comparative characteristics of predictors of poor prognosis

The purpose of the investigation was to study the morphological and clinical characteristics affecting the long-term prognosis after implantation of bioengineered and drug-eluting stents in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). The investigation covered 2362 patients with CHD. Genous bioengineered stents were implanted in 316 patients; Cypher rapamycin-eluting stents were in 2046 patients. The independent poor factor for complications was discontinuation of antiaggregatory therapy due to surgical interventions of different types in the drug-eluting stent group and stenting of extensive stenoses in the bioengineered stent group.