Clinical Outcome of First- vs Second-Generation DES According to DAPT Duration: Results of ARCTIC-Generation
Affiliation auteurs | !!!! Error affiliation !!!! |
Titre | Clinical Outcome of First- vs Second-Generation DES According to DAPT Duration: Results of ARCTIC-Generation |
Type de publication | Journal Article |
Year of Publication | 2016 |
Auteurs | Collet J-P, Silvain J, Kerneis M, Cuisset T, Meneveau N, Boueri Z, Barthelemy O, Range G, Cayla G, Van Belle E, Elhadad S, Carrie D, Caussin C, Rousseau H, Aubry P, Monsegu J, Sabouret P, O'Connor SA, Abtan J, Saint-Etienne C, Beygui F, Vicaut E, Montalescot G, Investigators ARCTIC |
Journal | CLINICAL CARDIOLOGY |
Volume | 39 |
Pagination | 192-200 |
Date Published | APR |
Type of Article | Article |
ISSN | 0160-9289 |
Résumé | {There is an apparent benefit with extension of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 1 year after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES). Assessment by a Double Randomization of a Conventional Antiplatelet Strategy vs a Monitoring-Guided Strategy for Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation, and of Treatment Interruption vs Continuation One Year After Stenting (ARCTIC)-Generation assessed whether there is a difference of outcome between first- vs second-generation DES and if there is an interaction with DAPT duration in the ARCTIC-Interruption study. ARCTIC-Interruption randomly allocated 1259 patients 1 year after stent implantation to a strategy of interruption of DAPT (n = 624), in which aspirin antiplatelet treatment only was maintained, or DAPT continuation (n = 635) for 6 to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization. A total of 520 and 722 patients received a first- and a second-generation DES, respectively. After a median follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range, 15-18 months) after randomization, the primary endpoint occurred in 32 (6.2%) and 19 (2.6%) patients with first- and second-generation DES, respectively (hazard ratio: 2.31, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.07 |
DOI | 10.1002/clc.22512 |