Novel Oral Anticoagulants Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Two Approaches to Triple Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Which Is More Efficient and Safer?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and atrial fibrillation (AF) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at high risk of bleeding and thromboembolic events. Thus, optimal treatment strategies in this challenging subset have been controversial. Herein, we aim to investigate different triple antithrombotic treatment (TAT) strategies in patients with ACS and AF after PCI.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study based on all consecutive patients with the diagnosis of ACS and AF treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) plus dual antiplatelet therapy using a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel) and aspirin (for 1 to 3 months) and observed for 12 months for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding incidents.

RESULTS

MACE occurred in 26.6% of patients treated with the VKA and 30.9% with NOAC (p = 0.659). Bleeding occurred in 7.8% of patients treated with VKA and 7.4% with NOAC (ns).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with ACS and AF who had undergone PCI, there was no significant difference in the risk of bleeding and ischemic events among those who received TAT with NOAC and VKA.

Preparation, characterization, and pharmacokinetics of rivaroxaban cocrystals with enhanced in vitro and in vivo properties in beagle dogs

Rivaroxaban (RIV) is a direct Factor Xa inhibitor anticoagulant, but the oral bioavailability of RIV is estimated to be only 60% due to its poor solubility. The aim of the present study was to improve the solubility and bioavailability of RIV. Five cocrystals—p-hydroxybenzoic acid (HBA), 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid (DBA), nicotinamide (NA), isonicotinamide (IA), and succinic acid (SA)—were used as cofomers and were successfully obtained and characterized by powder X-ray diffraction, thermal analysis, and Fourier transform infrared spectra. RIV-DBA and RIV-HBA cocrystals showed obvious improvements in solubility, dissolution (under sink conditions), and intrinsic dissolution rates versus RIV. Moreover, the dissolution of RIV-HBA, RIV-DBA, and RIV-SA cocrystals under non-sink conditions showed obvious “spring and parachute” patterns. The in vitro permeability levels in a Caco-2 cell model of RIV-DBA and RIV-IA cocrystals were significantly improved versus RIV. Pharmacokinetic studies in beagle dogs showed that RIV-DBA and RIV-HBA cocrystals had higher bioavailability than RIV. The enhancements in solubility and bioavailability indicate the potential of RIV cocrystals as a better candidate for the treatment of thrombosis versus RIV.

Inflammatory biomarkers and risk of cardiovascular events in patients undergoing coronary angiography

BACKGROUND

Inflammation, measured by traditional biomarkers such as C-reactive protein, has been linked to cardiovascular (CV) events. Recent technological advancement has allowed for measuring larger numbers of inflammatory biomarkers. A contemporary evaluation with established and novel biomarkers of inflammation is needed.

METHODS

1,090 individuals who underwent coronary angiography were enrolled. Twenty-four inflammatory biomarkers were collected prior to angiography. Unsupervised machine learning cluster analyses determined unique patterns of inflammatory biomarkers. Cox proportional hazard regression assessed both association of inflammatory biomarker clusters and individual biomarker associations with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke, and CV death) during a median follow-up of 3.67 years.

RESULTS

Four distinct clusters were recognized. Incremental increases in inflammatory biomarkers were observed from cluster 1 to cluster 4. During follow-up, 263 MACE were ascertained. Considering cluster 1 as a reference, study participants with inflammatory cluster 2 (Hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-2.37), cluster 3 (HR 1.89, CI: 1.25-2.85), and cluster 4 (HR 2.93, CI: 1.95-4.42) were at increased risk of MACE. Interleukin (IL)-1α IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12, Adhesion molecule-1 high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ferritin, myeloperoxidase, macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1a, MIP 3, and macrophage colony-stimulating factor-1 were independently associated with MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Among persons undergoing coronary angiography procedures, distinct clusters of inflammatory biomarker distributions with significant prognostic meaning may be identified. These results may identify unique targets for anti-inflammatory treatments aimed at CV disease.

Preoperative echocardiogram does not increase time to surgery in hip fracture patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to (1) assess the effect of preoperative echocardiogram on time to surgery and (2) assess the outcomes of patients with a previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, quality and cost data were obtained and a validated risk predictive tool (STTGMA) was calculated for each of a consecutive series of hip fracture patients. Comparative analyses of patients who had an echocardiogram prior to surgery or a PCI prior to hospitalization were performed.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2020, 2625 patients presented to our institution with a hip fracture. From this cohort 471 patients underwent a preoperative transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), 30 who had a history of a PCI, and an additional 26 who had a history of PCI but did not undergo a preoperative TTE. Those undergoing a preoperative TTE had similar time (days) to surgery (1.73 vs 1.77, p = 0.86) and 30-day mortality (4% vs 7%, p = 0.545) regardless of PCI history. PCI patients who underwent a preoperative TTE experienced increased rates of 1-year mortality (27% vs 10%, p = 0.007) and major complications (23% vs 12%, p = 0.08) compared to those without a PCI history. PCI patients undergoing a preoperative TTE had a similar time (days) to surgery (1.77 vs 1.48, .p = 0.397) compared to PCI patients without a preoperative TTE. Patients who underwent a preoperative TTE had higher rates of 90-day readmission (31.0% vs 8.0%, p = 0.047) and 1-year mortality (26.7% vs 3.8%, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Having a preoperative TTE does not affect surgical wait times in hip fracture patients regardless of PCI history, but it may not improve mortality outcomes or reduce postoperative complications in patients with a history of a PCI.

Role and Timing of Aspirin Therapy Following PCI in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

In patients with atrial fibrillation who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), both anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor) are indicated. However, this "triple" antithrombotic therapy is associated with high rates of bleeding. Finding the right balance of reducing ischemic risk and protecting coronary stents from restenosis while not increasing bleeding risk is difficult. In the past 5 years, 6 randomized clinical trials have shown the benefit of dropping aspirin from the triple therapy regimen to create "dual" therapy (oral anticoagulants and P2Y₁₂ inhibitors alone) with reductions in bleeding without a significant increase in ischemic events. Because of small trends toward higher risk of stent thrombosis, especially in higher risk patients with acute coronary syndromes, current recommendations call for dual therapy as the "default" regimen, but that risk stratification be used to help inform the decision on potentially using a brief period of triple therapy in selected high ischemic risk patients. For long-term therapy (after one year post-PCI), recent studies have found oral anticoagulation alone without any antiplatelet therapy has a favorable benefit risk ratio. Thus, while dropping aspirin at varying times post-PCI has become an attractive strategy in many patient groups, careful patient selection and individualized assessment of the risk:benefit balance is warranted.