Impact of Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After Risk Stratification With the CHA2DS2-VASc Score

• Published in: Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine Vol. 9; p. 808571
• Main Authors: Qiu, Miaohan, Ma, Sicong, Li, Yi, Li, Jing, Liu, Rong, Zhang, Jiaoyang, Han, Yaling
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Frontiers Media S.A 04.04.2022
• Subjects: acute coronary syndrome; Cardiovascular Medicine; CHA2DS2-VASc score; P2Y12 receptor inhibitor; percutaneous coronary intervention; prognosis
• ISSN: 2297-055X; 2297-055X
• DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.808571

Backgrounds The clinical benefit of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in unselected patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial in the real world. This study was aimed to investigate the impact of ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in subjects with ACS without atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF) after PCI based on risk stratification using the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score. Methods In 2016–2019, patients who underwent PCI with at least one stent implanted in the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command were classified as low- or high-risk groups according to the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score. Incidences of 12-month ischemia [cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke], all-cause death, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2,3,5 bleeding, BARC 3,5 bleeding, and net adverse clinical events (NACEs) (all-cause death, MI, stroke, or BARC 3, 5 bleeding) with aspirin plus different P2Y 12 inhibitors (clopidogrel or ticagrelor) were appraised among different risk groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox multivariate analysis were used to balance the groups. Results A total of consecutive 17,037 patients with ACS were enrolled. The optimal cut-off value of the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score for ischemic events by the Youden test was 3 points. Among patients with high risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥ 3, n = 6,151), ticagrelor was associated with slightly lower risks of ischemic events (2.29% vs. 3.54%, P = 0.02) and stroke (0.39% vs. 1.08%, P = 0.01) without excessive risk of BARC 3, 5 bleeding events (2.16% vs. 2.11%, P = 0.92) compared to clopidogrel within 12 months after PCI. For patients with low risk (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc < 3, n = 10,886), a statistically significant difference was seen in the incidence of overall 12-month BARC 2, 3, 5 bleeding events by P2Y 12 receptor inhibitor (4.00% vs. 3.26%) with a similar incidence of the ischemic events (1.40% vs. 1.52%). Results in the PSM cohort and the adjustment with Cox multivariate analysis were consistent with the main outcomes. Conclusion Higher CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores were associated with a higher incidence of 1-year ischemic events for the patients with ACS after PCI. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with lower ischemic events within 12 months after PCI without excessive risk of bleeding in high-risk patients but shows poor safety with excess bleeding in low-risk patients.