Cited by 97Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics

Outcomes of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Receiving an Oral Anticoagulant and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

Open access
Jackson, Larry R., Ju, Christine, Zettler, Marjorie, Messenger, John C., Cohen, David J., Stone, Gregg W., Baker, Brian A., Effron, Mark +2 more·2015·JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

Abstract

Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine whether bleeding risk varies depending on which P2Y12 receptor inhibitor agent is used.Background Prior studies have shown significant bleeding risk among patients treated with triple therapy (i.e., oral anticoagulant, P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, and aspirin).Methods We evaluated patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at 233 hospitals in the United States enrolled in the TRANSLATE-ACS (Treatment with Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome) study (April 2010 to October 2012). Using inverse probability-weighted propensity modeling, we compared 6-month adjusted risks of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding, stratifying by whether or not bleeding was associated with rehospitalization among patients discharged on aspirin + anticoagulant + clopidogrel (triple-C), aspirin + anticoagulant + prasugrel (triple-P), aspirin + clopidogrel (dual-C), or aspirin + prasugrel (dual-P).Results Of 11,756 MI patients, 526 (4.5%) were discharged on triple-C, 91 (0.8%) on triple-P, 7,715 (66%) on dual-C, and 3,424 (29%) on dual-P. Compared with dual-therapy patients, triple-therapy patients had significantly higher any BARC-defined bleeding. Triple-P was associated with a greater risk of any BARC-defined bleeding events compared with triple-C. This finding was driven mostly by an increased risk of bleeding events that were patient-reported only and did not require rehospitalization. There were no significant differences in bleeding requiring rehospitalization between the triple-P and -C groups.Conclusions Among MI patients, the addition of an oral anticoagulant was associated with a significantly greater risk of any BARC-defined bleeding relative to dual antiplatelet therapy, regardless of which P2Y12 receptor inhibitor was selected. Among patients on triple therapy, prasugrel use was associated with higher patient-reported-only bleeding, but not bleeding requiring rehospitalization, than clopidogrel-treated patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.08.018

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The use of prasugrel or ticagrelor as part of triple therapy is associated with a greater risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel.

    “The use of prasugrel or ticagrelor as part of triple therapy should be avoided unless there is a clear need for these agents (e.g.stent thrombosis on aspirin plus clopidogrel), given the lack of evidence and the greater risk of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel.522,523”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jackson, L. R., Ju, C., Zettler, M., Messenger, J. C., Cohen, D. J., Stone, G. W., Baker, B. A., Effron, M., Peterson, E. D., & Wang, T. Y.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • Eli Lilly (United States) (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • Saint Luke's Hospital (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Daiichi Sankyo (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Jackson, Larry R.
Venue
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-12
Volume
8
Issue
14
Pages
1880-1889
ISSN
  • 1876-7605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-8798
OpenAlex
W2198571942
Cited by
97
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 1
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Keywords
acute myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, oral anticoagulants, dual antiplatelet therapy, triple therapy, P2Y12 inhibitors, prasugrel, clopidogrel, bleeding risk, hospital readmission
MeSH terms
Prasugrel Hydrochloride, Clopidogrel, Administration, Oral, Aged, Aspirin, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Hemorrhage, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Ticlopidine, Time Factors, United States, Incidence, Survival Rate, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment, Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review