Comparison of the Efficacy in No-Reflow Prevention Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Diabetic Patients With STEMI

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.

Abstract

Background: Even when epicardial blood flow is restored, achieving adequate perfusion to the microvascular level is the goal. The generous utilization of antithrombotics may facilitate bleeding. We aimed to compare the efficacy in preventing no-reflow between ticagrelor and traditional loading with clopidogrel in diabetic patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and to assess the safety of ticagrelor administration regarding the short-term bleeding risk.
 
Methods: The present single-center prospective randomized trial consecutively randomized 300 diabetic patients admitted to the emergency department with STEMI into 2 groups: ticagrelor and clopidogrel. All the patients underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), during which the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade and the myocardial blush grade (MBG) were recorded. We followed up on the patients for 3 months to detect short-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and bleeding events.
 
Results: The mean age of the studied population was 56 years, with a male predominance (70%). The median pain-to-door time was 8 hours. The no-reflow phenomenon was encountered more frequently in the clopidogrel group than in the ticagrelor group (37.3% vs 14%). Higher TIMI flow grades and MBGs were achieved in the ticagrelor group, and the difference was statistically significant. No significant differences, however, existed between the groups concerning MACE, stent thrombosis, and mortality. More bleeding episodes were recorded in the ticagrelor group but with no statistical significance.
 
Conclusions: Ticagrelor should be the first choice among P2Y12 inhibitors in the setting of primary PCI, especially in diabetic patients, due to its high efficacy and safety profile, even in elderly patients. (Iranian Heart Journal 2023; 24(4): 14-25)

Keywords

References

  1. Stone GW and Peterson MA (2002): Impact of normalized myocardial perfusion after successful angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. JACC. 39(4):591-597.
  2. Morishima I, Sone T, Okumura K, et al. (2000): Angiographic no-reflow phenomenon as a predictor of adverse long-term outcome in patients treated with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for first acute myocardial infarction. JACC; 36: 1202-1209
  3. Galiuto L, Garramone B, Burzotta F, et al. (2006): Thrombus aspiration reduces microvascular obstruction after primary coronary intervention: a myocardial contrast echocardiography substudy of the REMEDIA Trial. Journal of the American College of Cardiology; 48(7):1355-60.
  4. Lee CH, Tse HF (2010): Microvascular obstruction after percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;75(3): 369-377.
  5. Smith GL and Masoudi FA (2008): Renal impairment predicts long-term mortality risk after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Soc Nephrol. 19(1):141-150.
  6. Komosa A, Lesiak M, Krasiński Z, et al. (2019): Optimal Timing of P2Y12 Inhibitor Loading in Patients Undergoing PCI: A Meta-Analysis. Thromb Haemost; 119(6):1000-2.
  7. Headrick JP and Lasley RD (2009): Adenosine receptors and reperfusion injury of the heart Handb Exp Pharmacol. 193:189–214.
  8. Subherwal S, Bach RG, Chen AY, et al. (2009): Baseline risk of major bleeding in non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction: the CRUSADE (can rapid risk stratification of unstable angina patients suppress ADverse outcomes with early implementation of the ACC/AHA guidelines) bleeding score. Circulation; 119(14):1873-82.
  9. Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL et al. (2011): Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials a consensus report from the bleeding academic research consortium. Circulation; 123:2736–2747.
  10. Cosentino F, Grant PJ, Aboyans V et al. (2020): ESC Scientific Document Group, 2019 ESC Guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD: The Task Force for diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), European Heart Journal, 41(2): 255–323
  11. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. (2018): Executive Group on behalf of the Joint European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/World Heart Federation (WHF) Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction, J Am Coll Cardiol. 72(18):2231-2264.
  12. Gibson CM, Murphy SA, Rizzo MJ, et al. (1999): Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) study group. Relationship between TIMI frame count and clinical outcomes after thrombolytic administration. Circulation. 99: 1945–50.
  13. Van't Hof AW, Liem A, de Boer MJ, et al. (1997): Myocardial Infarction Study Group. Clinical value of 12-lead electrocardiogram after successful reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction. The Lancet. 350(9078):615-9.
  14. Sianos G, Papafaklis MI, Serruys PW (2010): Angiographic thrombus burden classification in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol. 22:6–14.
  15. Kedev S (2014): The prevalence and outcomes of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome. Analysis from the single-centre ISACS-TC Registry (International Survey of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Transitional Countries) (2010-12). European Heart Journal Supplements. Eur. Heart. J (Suppl.); 16(A): 33–41.
  16. Roberto M, Luigi PB, Victor M, et al. (2015): Recommendations for Cardiac Chamber Quantification by Echocardiography in Adults: An Update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. European Heart Journal – Cardiovascular Imaging. 16(3):233-71.
  17. Storey RF, Angiolillo DJ, Patil SB, et al. (2010): Inhibitory effects of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel on platelet function in patients with acute coronary syndromes: the PLATO (PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes) PLATELET substudy. JACC; 56:1456–62.
  18. Wang X, Li X, Wu H, et al. (2019): Beneficial effect of ticagrelor on microvascular perfusion in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing a primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Coron Artery Dis; 30(5):317-322.
  19. Kim EK, Park TK, Yang JH, et al. (2017): Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel on Myocardial Infarct Size in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JACC; 69(16):2098-2099.
  20. Tang X, LI R, Jing Q, et al. (2016): Assessment of Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel Treatment in Patients With ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol; 68(2): 115-20.
  21. Dai W, Ye Z, Li L, et al. (2018): Effect of preoperative loading dose ticagrelor and clopidogrel on no-reflow phenomenon during intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Des Devel Ther; 12:2039-2049.
  22. Di Vito L, Versaci F, Limbruno U, et al. (2016): Impact of oral P2Y12 inhibitors on residual thrombus burden and reperfusion indexes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown).17(9):701-6.
  23. Armstrong PW, Siha H, Fu Y, et al. (2012): ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes in the Platelet inhibition and Patient outcomes trial: insights from the ECG substudy. Circulation; 125:514-21.
  24. Parodi G, Valenti R, Bellandi B, et al. (2013): Comparison of prasugrel and ticagrelor loading doses in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: RAPID (Rapid Activity of Platelet Inhibitor Drugs) primary PCI study. J Am Coll Cardiol; 61:1601–6.
  25. Alexopoulos D, Xanthopoulou I, Gkizas V, et al. (2012): Randomized assessment of ticagrelor versus prasugrel antiplatelet effects in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 5:797–804.
  26. Guan W, Lu H, Yang K (2018): Choosing between ticagrelor and clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis (2007–2017). Medicine; 97(43).
  27. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. (2009): Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med; 361:1045–57.
  28. Szummer K, Montez-Rath ME, Alfredsson J, et al. (2020): Comparison Between Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Elderly Patients With an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From the SWEDEHEART Registry. Circulation 2020.
  29. Husted S, James S, Becker RC, et al. (2012): Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elderly patients with acute coronary syndromes: a sub study from the prospective randomized PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.; 5(5):680-8.
Iranian Heart Journal
Volume 24, Issue 4
October 2023
Pages 14-25

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics