345
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI: integrating procedural complexity, bleeding risk and the acuteness of clinical presentation

, &
Pages 735-748 | Received 19 Apr 2018, Accepted 11 Sep 2018, Published online: 04 Oct 2018
 

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor constitutes the standard of care to prevent major adverse cardiac events in patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). However, the anti-ischemic benefits of DAPT are counterbalanced by an increased risk of hemorrhagic complications, which are known to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. While the efficacy of DAPT in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been well established, the risk-benefit balance of DAPT in other subsets of patients remain controversial. As a result, multiple risk scores to inform optimal duration of DAPT have been developed recently for individuals with various degrees of coronary artery disease.

Areas covered: Authors summarize the current evidence and guideline recommendations on the optimal duration and intensity of DAPT across the spectrum of coronary artery disease including those who undergo complex PCI and recapitulated the recently developed risk scores to inform clinical decision on the optimal duration of DAPT.

Expert commentary: Clinical decision-making for upfront duration of DAPT after PCI with DES should consider the individual bleeding risk profile, the initial clinical presentation and the complexity of coronary stenting.

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer Disclosures

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial relationships or otherwise to disclose.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.