Safety and effectiveness of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: insights from the SPUM-ACS study
European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, ISSN: 2055-6845, Vol: 10, Issue: 5, Page: 391-402
2024
- 1Citations
- 14Captures
- 4Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Most Recent News
Study Reveals Gender Disparities in Long-Term Lipid Management After ACS for FH Patients; An analysis of patients with acute coronary syndrome shows women receive less lipid-lowering therapy and are less likely to meet LDL-C targets than men.
An analysis of data from more than 3100 patients with a history of acute coronary syndrome is shedding light on disparities in management among men
Article Description
Aims: Data on glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) use in real-world acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients following the introduction of potent PY inhibitors and newer-generation stents are scant. Here, we aimed to assess the utilization, effectiveness, and safety of GPI in a large prospective multicentre cohort of contemporary ACS patients. Methods and results: SPUM-ACS prospectively recruited patients presenting with ACS between 2009 and 2017. The primary endpoint of the present study was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke at 1 year. Secondary endpoints were defined as any bleeding events, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3-5 bleeding, and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE). A total of 4395 ACS patients were included in the analysis. GPI-treated patients had more total coronary artery occlusion (56% vs. 35%, P < 0.001) and thrombus (60% vs. 35%, P < 0.001) at angiography. Among the propensity score-matched (PSM) population (1992 patients equally split into two groups), GPI-treated patients showed lower risk of MACE [PSM adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.49-0.99], but a higher risk of any (PSM adjusted HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-1.99) and major bleedings (PSM adjusted HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.09-2.76), resulting in a neutral effect on NACE (PSM adjusted HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.17). These results remained consistent across all subgroups. Conclusions: In patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and receiving potent PY inhibitors, we observed a reduced risk of MACE and an increased risk of major bleedings at 1 year in patients treated with GPI. Although the routine use of GPI is currently not recommended, they might be considered in selected patients following a personalized balancing between ischaemic and bleeding risks.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85201379619&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvae024; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38604747; https://academic.oup.com/ehjcvp/article/10/5/391/7644352; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvae024; https://academic.oup.com/ehjcvp/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvae024/7644352?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know