| Literature DB >> 34906162 |
Chiao-Chin Lee1, Chiao-Hsiang Chang1, Yuan Hung1, Chin-Sheng Lin1, Shih-Ping Yang1, Shu-Meng Cheng1, Fan-Han Yu1, Wei-Shiang Lin1, Wen-Yu Lin2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial. The aim of this longitudinal cohort study is to investigate the prescribing pattern of antithrombotic regimen in different cohorts and its subsequent impact. SETTING ANDEntities:
Keywords: Acute coronary syndrome; Antithrombotic; Atrial fibrillation; Cohort; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Prescription
Year: 2021 PMID: 34906162 PMCID: PMC8670061 DOI: 10.1186/s12959-021-00353-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Thromb J ISSN: 1477-9560
Fig. 1Algorithm of study design. The flow chart demonstrated the selection criteria and patient deposition by the timing of PIONEER AF-PCI study. AF, atrial fibrillation; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; CAD, coronary artery disease; CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting, NSTEMI, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
Comparison of clinical characteristics between two longitudinal cohorts
| Characteristics | Overall population ( | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline characteristics | |||
| Age (years) | 71.7±11.4 | 73.6±12.3 | 0.418 |
| Male, N (%) | 25 (71.4) | 60 (69.8) | 0.856 |
| Hypertension, N (%) | 32 (91.4) | 73 (84.9) | 0.259 |
| Diabetes mellitus, N (%) | 20 (57.1) | 37 (43.0) | 0.158 |
| Dyslipidemia, N (%) | 12 (34.3) | 32 (37.2) | 0.762 |
| Prior MI, N (%) | 18 (51.4) | 42 (48.8) | 0.796 |
| Prior stroke/TIA, N (%) | 9 (25.7) | 16 (18.6) | 0.381 |
| Prior heart failure, N (%) | 17 (48.6) | 34 (39.5) | 0.361 |
| Uremia, N (%) | 7 (20.0) | 17 (19.8) | 0.977 |
| Echocardiographic characteristics | |||
| LAD (mm) | 46.59±7.88 | 44.04±8.25 | 0.138 |
| LVEF (%) | 49.69±14.36 | 51.67±16.34 | 0.552 |
| AF characteristics | |||
| Paroxysmal AF, N (%) | 24 (68.6) | 36 (41.9) | 0.008 |
| CHA2DS2-VASc score | 4.5±1.9 | 4.1±1.7 | 0.187 |
| HAS-BLED score | 3.5±1.1 | 3.2±1.1 | 0.182 |
MI, myocardial infarction; TIA, transient ischemic attack; LAD, left atrium dimension; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; AF, atrial fibrillation
Fig. 2The distribution of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores in the two longitudinal cohorts. The detailed information of (A) CHA2DS2-VASc and (B) HAS-BLED score were presented. The mean values of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were similar between the two cohorts
Comparison of clinical presentation, coronary lesion characteristics, and stent types between two longitudinal cohorts
| Characteristics | Overall population ( | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical presentation | |||
| ACS presentation, N (%) | 13 (37.1) | 33 (38.4) | 0.899 |
| Coronary lesion characteristics | |||
| LM lesion, N (%) | 3 (2.3) | 5 (5.7) | 0.421 |
| LAD lesion, N (%) | 35 (100.0) | 77 (89.5) | 0.041 |
| LCX lesion, N (%) | 24 (68.6) | 54 (62.8) | 0.547 |
| RCA, N (%) | 28 (80.0) | 61 (70.9) | 0.305 |
| Stent placement, N (%) | 30 (85.7) | 77 (89.5) | 0.544 |
| Stent types | |||
| DES, N (%)* | 18 (51.4) | 53 (61.6) | 0.302 |
| BMS, N (%) | 13 (37.1) | 23 (26.7) | 0.257 |
| BVS, N (%) | 1 (2.9) | 1 (1.2) | 0.497 |
ACS, acute coronary syndrome; LM, left main coronary artery; LAD, left anterior descending artery; LCX, left circumflex artery; RCA, right coronary artery; DES, drug-eluting stent, BMS, bare-metal stent; BVS, bioresorbable scaffold
* Two patients received both drug-eluting stent and bare-metal stent placement during the same procedure in cohort 1
Fig. 3Prescribing patterns of antithrombotic regimen in the two longitudinal cohorts. A The bar plot demonstrated the longitudinal changes of prescribing patterns of antithrombotic regimens. B The detailed information regarding distribution of all compositions of antithrombotic regimen in the tow cohorts. * indicated the significant difference between the two cohorts
Comparison of medication at discharge between two longitudinal cohorts
| Characteristics | Overall population ( | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACEI/ARB, N (%) | 13 (37.1) | 48 (55.8) | 0.063 |
| Aldactone, N (%) | 7 (20.0) | 23 (26.7) | 0.436 |
| Beta-blocker, N (%) | 29 (82.9) | 65 (75.6) | 0.383 |
| Statin, N (%) | 21 (60.0) | 48 (55.8) | 0.673 |
| Digoxin, N (%) | 4 (11.4) | 9 (10.5) | 1.000 |
| Propafenone, N (%) | 1 (2.9) | 1 (1.2) | 0.497 |
| Cordarone, N (%) | 7 (20.0) | 29 (33.7) | 0.134 |
ACEI, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin II receptor blocker
Comparison of clinical outcomes between two longitudinal cohorts
| Clinical Outcomes | Overall Cohort ( | Cohort 2 vs. Cohort 1 | P Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohort 1 ( | Cohort 2 ( | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | ||
| Primary safety endpoint, N (%) | 11 (31.4) | 22 (25.6) | 0.87 (0.42-1.80) | 0.710 |
| Major bleeding, N (%) | 10 (28.6) | 17 (19.8) | 0.74 (0.34-1.62) | 0.456 |
| CRNMB, N (%) | 1 (2.9) | 5 (5.8) | 2.16 (0.25-18.45) | 0.483 |
| Secondary efficacy endpoint, N (%) | 7 (20.0) | 17 (19.8) | 0.96 (0.40-2.32) | 0.930 |
| All-cause death, N (%) | 2 (5.7) | 8 (9.3) | 1.57 (0.33-7.41) | 0.567 |
| Stroke/SE, N (%) | 1 (2.9) | 4 (4.7) | 1.60 (0.18-14.28) | 0.676 |
| Nonfatal MI, N (%) | 2 (5.7) | 2 (2.3) | 0.39 (0.06-2.79) | 0.350 |
| Revascularization, N (%) | 2 (5.7) | 3 (3.5) | 0.60 (0.10-3.59) | 0.576 |
Fig. 4Kaplan-Meier curve of cumulative incidence of study endpoints. The Kaplan-Meier curve of accumulative incidences of (A) primary safety endpoints and (B) secondary efficacy endpoints showed no significant differences in the two cohorts