Prasugrel versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00159816%3A_____%2F16%3A00065502" target="_blank" >RIV/00159816:_____/16:00065502 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/65269705:_____/16:00065502 RIV/00843989:_____/16:E0105669 RIV/44555601:13450/16:43887918

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024823" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024823</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024823" target="_blank" >10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.024823</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Prasugrel versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

BACKGROUND: No randomized "head-to-head" comparison of the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel has been published in the seven years since the higher efficacy of these newer P2Y12 inhibitors were first demonstrated relative to clopidogrel. The study was prematurely terminated for futility. The occurrence of the primary endpoint did not differ between groups receiving prasugrel and ticagrelor (4.0% and 4.1%, respectively; OR (95% CI) 0.98 (0.55; 1.73); P=0.939). No significant difference was found in any of the components of the primary endpoint. The occurrence of key secondary end-point within 30 days, composed of cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, or stroke did not show any significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor (2.7% and 2.5%, respectively; OR (95% CI) 1.06 (0.53; 2.15); P=0.864). CONCLUSION: This head-to-head comparison of prasugrel and ticagrelor does not support the hypothesis that one is more effective or safer than the other in preventing ischemic and bleeding events in the acute phase of myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI strategy. The observed rates of major outcomes were similar, although with broad confidence intervals around the estimates. These interesting observations need to be confirmed in a larger trial.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Prasugrel versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Popis výsledku anglicky

BACKGROUND: No randomized "head-to-head" comparison of the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel has been published in the seven years since the higher efficacy of these newer P2Y12 inhibitors were first demonstrated relative to clopidogrel. The study was prematurely terminated for futility. The occurrence of the primary endpoint did not differ between groups receiving prasugrel and ticagrelor (4.0% and 4.1%, respectively; OR (95% CI) 0.98 (0.55; 1.73); P=0.939). No significant difference was found in any of the components of the primary endpoint. The occurrence of key secondary end-point within 30 days, composed of cardiovascular death, non-fatal MI, or stroke did not show any significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor (2.7% and 2.5%, respectively; OR (95% CI) 1.06 (0.53; 2.15); P=0.864). CONCLUSION: This head-to-head comparison of prasugrel and ticagrelor does not support the hypothesis that one is more effective or safer than the other in preventing ischemic and bleeding events in the acute phase of myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI strategy. The observed rates of major outcomes were similar, although with broad confidence intervals around the estimates. These interesting observations need to be confirmed in a larger trial.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

FA - Kardiovaskulární nemoci včetně kardiochirurgie

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Circulation

ISSN

0009-7322

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

134

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

21

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

10

Strana od-do

1603-1612

Kód UT WoS článku

000388466500009

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—