Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Comparison of Antiplatelet Monotherapies After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to Clinical, Ischemic, and Bleeding Risks

  • Seokhun Yang
  • , Jeehoon Kang
  • , Kyung Woo Park
  • , Seung Ho Hur
  • , Nam Ho Lee
  • , Doyeon Hwang
  • , Han Mo Yang
  • , Hyo Suk Ahn
  • , Kwang Soo Cha
  • , Sang Ho Jo
  • , Jae Kean Ryu
  • , Il Woo Suh
  • , Hyun Hee Choi
  • , Seong Ill Woo
  • , Jung Kyu Han
  • , Eun Seok Shin
  • , Bon Kwon Koo
  • , Hyo Soo Kim
  • Seoul National University
  • Keimyung University
  • Hallym University
  • Pusan National University
  • Catholic University of Daegu
  • Anyang
  • Inha University
  • University of Ulsan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

30 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Clopidogrel was superior to aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefits of clopidogrel across high-risk subgroups Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of the HOST-EXAM (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery diseases-EXtended Antiplatelet Monotherapy) trial that randomly assigned patients who were event free for 6 to 18 months post-PCI on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to clopidogrel or aspirin monotherapy. Two clinical risk scores were used for risk stratification: the DAPT score and the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS 2°P) (the sum of age ≥75 years, diabetes, hypertension, current smoking, peripheral artery disease, stroke, coronary artery bypass grafting, heart failure, and renal dysfunction). The primary composite endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission because of acute coronary syndrome, and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type ≥3) at 2 years after randomization. Results: Among 5,403 patients, clopidogrel monotherapy showed a lower rate of the primary composite endpoint than aspirin monotherapy (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.90). The benefit of clopidogrel over aspirin was consistent regardless of TRS 2°P (high TRS 2°P [≥3] group: HR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.44-0.96]; and low TRS 2°P [<3] group: HR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.60-0.99]) (P for interaction = 0.454) and regardless of DAPT score (high DAPT score [≥2] group: HR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.46-1.00]; and low DAPT score [<2] group: HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.59-0.96]) (P for interaction = 0.662). The association was similar for the individual outcomes. Conclusions: The beneficial effect of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of clinical risk or relative ischemic and bleeding risks compared with aspirin monotherapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1565-1578
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume82
Issue number16
DOIs
StatePublished - 17 Oct 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • aspirin
  • bleeding
  • clopidogrel
  • ischemic events
  • percutaneous coronary intervention

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Antiplatelet Monotherapies After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to Clinical, Ischemic, and Bleeding Risks'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this