4.3 Review

Bleeding after antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes: a review of the evidence and evolving paradigms

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON DRUG SAFETY
Volume 18, Issue 12, Pages 1171-1189

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2019.1680637

Keywords

Antiplatelet therapy; bleeding; risk stratification; secondary cardiovascular prevention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Potent platelet inhibition reduces the risk of thrombotic complications including myocardial infarction and death in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Targeting different pathways involved in thrombotic processes have synergistic effects and more effectively counteract thrombosis both in the acute and long-term following an ACS. Unavoidably, more potent platelet inhibition increases the risk of bleeding. In light of the adverse prognostic implications associated with bleeding, including increased mortality, safety aspects with antiplatelet therapy have gained increased importance. Areas covered: This review aims at describing the safety of different antiplatelet agents, particularly with regards to the risk of bleeding complications, used in the management of ACS patients. New bleeding reduction strategies to enhance the safety of antiplatelet therapy are also reviewed. Expert opinion: The final goal of a well-structured antiplatelet treatment strategy is that of tackling the spectrum of ischemic risk without compromising patient safety. A simple mnemonic rule for guiding therapeutic decisions in this complex clinical scenario can be summarized with the acronym 'ABC', meaning the sequential process of assessing, balancing and customizing treatment strategies in individual patients on the tradeoff between bleeding and ischemic risk. This approach is recommended for maximizing the ischemic benefits, while preserving safety, with the use of antiplatelet therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available