Thienopyridine use after coronary stenting in low income patients enrolled in medicare part D receiving maintenance dialysis

Age Modifies Intracranial and Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk from P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients Receiving Dialysis

Background

Individuals aged ≥75 years are the fastest-growing population starting dialysis for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) due to living longer with coronary artery disease. ESKD alone can increase bleeding risk, but P2Y₁₂ inhibitor (P2Y12-I) antiplatelet medications prescribed for cardiovascular treatment can exacerbate this risk in patients with ESKD. The age-specific rates of bleeding complications in dialysis patients with ESKD on P2Y12-I remain unclear, as does how age modifies the bleeding risk from P2Y12-I use in these patients.

Methods

In a retrospective cohort study, we collected data on 40,972 patients receiving maintenance hemo- or peritoneal dialysis who were newly prescribed P2Y12-I therapy between 2011 and 2015 from the USRDS registry. We analyzed the effect of age on the time to first bleed and the interactions between age and P2Y12-I type on modifying the effects of a bleed.

Results

Twenty percent of the cohort were aged ≥75 years. There were 3096 (8%) gastrointestinal (GI) and 1298 (3%) intracranial (IC) bleeding events during a median follow-up of 1 year. Annual incidence rates for IC bleeds were 2% in those aged <55 years and 3% in those aged ≥75 years. Rates for GI bleeds were 4% in those aged <55 years and 9% in those aged ≥75 years. On clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor, for every decade increase in age of the cohort members, the risk of IC bleed increased by 9%, 55%, and 59%, and the risk of GI bleed increased by 21%, 28%, and 39%, respectively. At age ≥75 years, prasugrel was associated with a greater risk of IC bleed than clopidogrel. At age ≥60 years, ticagrelor was associated with a greater risk of GI bleed than clopidogrel.

Conclusions

More potent P2Y12-Is (prasugrel and ticagrelor) were associated with a disproportionately higher risk of IC bleed with increasing age compared with that of clopidogrel-prasugrel was much worse than clopidogrel at age ≥75 years. All three drugs were associated with only modest increase in the risk of GI bleed with every decade increase in age-ticagrelor was much worse than clopidogrel at ≥60 years of age. These results highlight the need for head-to-head clinical trials for the use of P2Y12-Is in patients with ESKD to determine age cutoffs where the risk of bleeding outweighs the benefits of thrombosis prevention.

Clinical outcomes of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary drug-eluting stent implantation in dialysis patients

Background

End-stage renal disease yields susceptibility to both ischemia and bleeding. The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is not established in dialysis patients, who are usually excluded from randomized studies. Since recent studies implied the benefits of prolonged DAPT >12 months in chronic kidney disease, we investigated the effectiveness and safety of prolonged DAPT in dialysis patients with higher cardiovascular risks.

Methods

In this nationwide population-based study, we analyzed dialysis patients who underwent DES implantation from 2008 to 2015. Continued DAPT was compared with discontinued DAPT using landmark analyses, including free-of-event participants at 12 (n = 2246), 15 (n = 1925) and 18 months (n = 1692) after DES implantation. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs): a composite of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization and stroke. Major bleeding was a safety outcome. Inverse probability of treatment weighting Cox regression was performed.

Results

Mean follow-up periods were 278.3-292.4 days, depending on landmarks. Overall, incidences of major bleeding were far lower than those of MACE. Continued DAPT groups showed lower incidences of MACE and higher incidences of major bleeding, compared with discontinued DAPT groups. In Cox analyses, continued DAPT reduced the hazards of MACE at the 12- [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.90; P = 0.003], 15- (HR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96; P = 0.019) and 18-month landmarks (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99; P = 0.041), but without a significant increase in major bleeding at 12 (HR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.90-2.16; P = 0.14), 15 (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.75-1.70; P = 0.55) or 18 months (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.83-1.95; P = 0.27).

Conclusions

Prolonged DAPT reduced MACE without significantly increasing major bleeding in patients who were event-free at 12 months after DES implantation. In deciding on DAPT duration, prolonged DAPT should be considered in dialysis patients.

Antithrombotic therapy in end-stage renal disease

The delicate balance of risk vs. benefit of using antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents in the general population is well established. The decision to use these agents in the end stage renal disease (ESRD) population remains complex and difficult. The concomitant association of a prothombotic state with high risk of bleeding in the ESRD population requires individualization and careful clinical judgment before implementing such therapy. There remains a paucity of clinical trials and lack of substantial evidence in literature for safe and effective use of antithrombotic drugs in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. The current review summarizes the pros and cons of using antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events, evaluate the risks with routine use of anticoagulation for cerebrovascular stroke prevention with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and role of newer oral anticoagulants as alternate agents in the dialysis population.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Clinical Outcomes after Coronary Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients on Hemodialysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate the benefits and risks of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

A nested case-control analysis of patients on hemodialysis after receipt of DES and DAPT treatment was conducted using data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database for the period 2007-2011. Cases of myocardial infarction or death within 1 year after DES implantation were matched one-to-one with control patients. Odds ratios were calculated to compare DAPT continuation with discontinuation. Additionally, a propensity score-adjusted 6-month landmark cohort analysis was also conducted to evaluate the long-term benefits and risks of prolonged (>6 months) compared with ≤6 months of DAPT use. The primary outcomes were death and myocardial infarction. The secondary outcomes were ischemic stroke, revascularization, and major bleeding.

RESULTS

In the nested case-control analysis, patients who continued DAPT had a lower rate of death or myocardial infarction within 1 year after receipt of a DES (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.81; P=0.003), whereas this association became statistically nonsignificant when compared with patients who discontinued DAPT for the period between 6 and 12 months after receipt of a DES (adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 3.04). In the propensity score-adjusted cohort analysis, >6 months of DAPT use was not associated with different primary or secondary outcomes than shorter-term use.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support that the clinical effectiveness of extended DAPT in a hemodialysis population may be tempered after 6 months post-DES implantation.

Comparison of Drug-Eluting and Bare Metal Stents in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare metal stents (BMSs) are both recommended to improve coronary revascularization and to treat coronary artery disease in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the potential superiority of DESs over BMSs for reducing the incidence of long-term major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality in CKD patients has not been established, and the results remain controversial. We aimed to systematically assess and quantify the total weight of evidence regarding the use of DESs versus BMSs in CKD patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this systematic review and conventional meta-analysis, electronic studies published in any language until May 20, 2016, were systematically searched through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing outcomes in CKD patients with DESs versus BMSs and extracted data in a standard form. Pooled odd ratios and 95% CIs were calculated using random- and fixed-effects models. Finally, 38 studies involving 123 396 patients were included. The use of DESs versus BMSs was associated with significant reductions in major adverse cardiovascular events (pooled odds ratio 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64-0.88; P<0.001), all-cause mortality (odds ratio 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90; P<0.001), myocardial infarction, target-lesion revascularization, and target-vessel revascularization. The superiority of DESs over BMSs for improving clinical outcomes was attenuated in randomized controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DESs significantly improves the above outcomes in CKD patients. Nevertheless, large-sized randomized controlled trials are necessary to determine the real effect on CKD patients and whether efficacy differs by type of DES.

Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents During PCI in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease on Dialysis

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce repeat revascularizations compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), but their effects on death and myocardial infarction (MI) are mixed. Few studies have focused on patients with end-stage renal disease.

OBJECTIVES

This study compared mortality and cardiovascular morbidity during percutaneous coronary intervention with DES and with BMS in dialysis patients.

METHODS

We identified 36,117 dialysis patients from the USRDS (United States Renal Data System) who had coronary stenting in the United States between April 23, 2003, and December 31, 2010, and examined the association of DES versus BMS with 1-year outcomes: death; death or MI; and death, MI, or repeat revascularization. We also conducted a temporal analysis by dividing the study period into 3 DES eras: Transitional (April 23, 2003, to June 30, 2004); Liberal (July 1, 2004, to December 31, 2006); and Selective (January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2010).

RESULTS

One-year event rates were high, with 38 deaths; 55 death or MI events; and 71 death, MI, or repeat revascularization events per 100 person-years. DES, compared with BMS, were associated with a significant 18% lower risk of death; 16% lower risk of death or MI; and 13% lower risk of death, MI, or repeat revascularization. DES use varied, from 56% in the Transitional era to 85% in the Liberal era and 62% in the Selective era. DES outcomes in the Liberal era were significantly better than in the Transitional Era, but not significantly better than in the Selective Era.

CONCLUSIONS

DES for percutaneous coronary intervention appears to be safe for use in U.S. dialysis patients and is associated with lower rates of death, MI, and repeat revascularization.

Percutaneous coronary interventions and antiplatelet therapy in renal transplant recipients

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity following renal transplantation (RT), accounting for 40-50% of all deaths. After renal transplantation, an adverse cardiovascular event occurs in nearly 40% of patients; given the dialysis vintage and the average wait time, the likelihood of receiving coronary revascularization is very high. There is a significant gap in the literature in terms of the outcomes of prophylactic coronary revascularization in renal transplantation candidates. Current guidelines on myocardial revascularization stipulate that renal transplant patients with significant coronary artery disease (CAD) should not be excluded from the potential benefit of revascularization. Compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), however, coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with higher early and 30-day mortality. About one-third of renal transplant patients with CAD have to be treated invasively and so PCI is currently the most popular mode of revascularization in these fragile and compromised patients. A newer generation drug-eluting stent (DES) should be preferred over a bare metal stent (BMS) because of its lower risk of restenosis and improved safety concerns (stent thrombosis) compared with first generation DES and BMS. Among DES, despite no significant differences being reported in terms of efficacy, the newer everolimus and zotarolimus eluting stents should be preferred given the possibility of discontinuing, if necessary, dual antiplatelet therapy before 12 months. Since there is a lack of randomized controlled trials, the current guidelines are inadequate to provide a specifically tailored antiplatelet therapeutic approach for renal transplant patients. At present, clopidogrel is the most used agent, confirming its central role in the therapeutic management of renal transplant patients undergoing PCI. While progress in malignancy-related mortality seems a more distant target, a slow but steady reduction in cardiovascular deaths, improving pharmacological and interventional therapy, is nowadays an achievable medium-term target in renal transplant patients.

Antiplatelet Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Context:

Coronary artery disease is highly prevalent among patients with end stage renal disease/hemodialysis (ESRD/HD) and coronary percutaneous interventions (PCI) has been increased by nearly 50% over the past decade. After PCI with stent placement, guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), but no specifically tailored pharmacotherapy approach is outlined for this frail population, mostly excluded from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

Evidence Acquisition:

We reviewed current evidences on the use of antiplatelet therapy in patients with ESRD/HD undergoing PCI, focusing on the efficacy and safety of specific agents and their indications for detailed clinical settings.

Results:

Clinical setting in HD patients is the principal determinant of the type, onset, combination and duration of the DAPT. However, irrespective clinical setting, in addition to aspirin, clopidogrel is currently the most used antiplatelet agent even if no information derived from RCTs are available in ESRD. Due to the large experience acquired in routine clinical practice, the awareness of safety is higher for clopidogrel than newer antiplatelet agents. Because of lack of data, the use of prasugrel and ticagrelor is actually not recommended. However, in case of high ischemic and acceptable bleeding risk, they may be selectively used in ESRD/HD.

Conclusions:

This investigation might contribute to delineate the best treatment options for this high risk population.