4.3 Review

Safety and efficacy of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON DRUG SAFETY
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 9-21

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2021.1850691

关键词

Antiplatelet therapy; bleeding; thrombosis; percutaneous coronary intervention; P2y(12) inhibitors; aspirin; atrial fibrillation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies have shown that P2Y(12) inhibitor monotherapy after a brief course of DAPT can reduce the risk of bleeding while still preventing thrombotic complications in patients undergoing PCI.
Introduction: Antiplatelet therapy represents a key strategy for the prevention of thrombotic complications in patients with both acute and chronic coronary syndromes, particularly those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is associated with a bleeding risk proportionate to its duration. Ever growing appreciation of the prognostic implications associated with bleeding and the development of safer stent platforms over the past years have led to a number of novel antiplatelet treatment strategies being tested among patients undergoing PCI. Areas covered: P2Y(12) inhibitor monotherapy after ashort course DAPT has emerged as ableeding reduction strategy to mitigate such risk while still preventing thrombotic complications. In this review we describe the latest evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of P2Y(12) inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing PCI in different clinical settings. Expert opinion: P2Y(12) inhibitor monotherapy after a brief period of DAPT has emerged as an effective approach to reduce the risk of bleeding without any tradeoff in efficacy (i.e., thrombotic complications). This strategy has shown consistent findings in a number of different clinical settings of patients undergoing PCI. Nevertheless, unanswered questions on the ideal patient and the precise P2Y(12) monotherapy regimen warrant further investigation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据