Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute st-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

  • Kang Yin Chen
  • , Seung Woon Rha*
  • , Yong Jian Li
  • , Kanhaiya L. Poddar
  • , Zhe Jin
  • , Yoshiyasu Minami
  • , Lin Wang
  • , Eung Ju Kim
  • , Chang Gyu Park
  • , Hong Seog Seo
  • , Dong Joo Oh
  • , Myung Ho Jeong
  • , Young Keun Ahn
  • , Taek Jong Hong
  • , Young Jo Kim
  • , Seung Ho Hur
  • , In Whan Seong
  • , Jei Keon Chae
  • , Myeong Chan Cho
  • , Jang Ho Bae
  • Dong Hoon Choi, Yang Soo Jang, In Ho Chae, Chong Jin Kim, Jung Han Yoon, Wook Sung Chung, Ki Bae Seung, Seung Jung Park
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Korea University

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND-: Whether triple antiplatelet therapy is superior or similar to dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of drug-eluting stents remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS-: A total of 4203 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents were analyzed retrospectively in the Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR). They received either dual (aspirin plus clopidogrel; dual group; n=2569) or triple (aspirin plus clopidogrel plus cilostazol; triple group; n=1634) antiplatelet therapy. The triple group received additional cilostazol at least for 1 month. Various major adverse cardiac events at 8 months were compared between these 2 groups. Compared with the dual group, the triple group had a similar incidence of major bleeding events but a significantly lower incidence of in-hospital mortality. Clinical outcomes at 8 months showed that the triple group had significantly lower incidences of cardiac death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.32 to 0.84; P=0.007), total death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.89; P=0.010), and total major adverse cardiac events (adjusted odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.95; P=0.019) than the dual group. Subgroup analysis showed that older (>65 years old), female, and diabetic patients got more benefits from triple antiplatelet therapy than their counterparts who received dual antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS-: Triple antiplatelet therapy seems to be superior to dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. These results may provide the rationale for the use of triple antiplatelet therapy in these patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3207-3214
Number of pages8
JournalCirculation
Volume119
Issue number25
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009.06.30

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

  • Cilostazol
  • Myocardial infarction
  • Platelets
  • Thrombosis

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute st-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this