Efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in Chinese patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with glycoprotein Ⅱb/Ⅲa receptor antagonist
10.3760/cma.j.cn112138-20200814-00756
- VernacularTitle:中国急性冠状动脉综合征患者使用糖蛋白Ⅱb/Ⅲa受体拮抗剂时替格瑞洛对比氯吡格雷的有效性和安全性
- Author:
Zhijiang XIE
;
Shuanli XIN
;
Chao CHANG
;
Haijing ZHOU
;
Xiufeng ZHAO
;
Lijun LIU
;
Fenghui JIAO
;
Chuan CHEN
;
Tao LI
- From:
Chinese Journal of Internal Medicine
2021;60(6):544-551
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To explore the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) Chinese patients using glycoprotein Ⅱb/Ⅲa inhibitor (GPI).Methods:The data from CCC-ACS (Improving Care for Cardiovascular Disease in China-ACS) project were systematically reviewed in ACS patients with GPI. The patients were divided into ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups. A logistic analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) were performed to compare occurrences of major cardiovascular events (MACE) and bleeding events between the two groups during hospitalization.Results:A total of 63 641 ACS patients were collected from 150 hospitals. Logistic regression analyses showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the reduction of MACE between ticagrelor and clopidogrel when using GPI ( OR=0.881, 95% CI 0.599-1.296; P=0.521). However, major bleeding rate was higher in the ticagrelor group than that in the clopidogrel group ( OR=1.401, 95% CI 1.075-1.852; P=0.013). Similar results were observed after PSM. No statistic difference in MACE between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel group ( OR=0.919, 95% CI 0.613-1.376; P=0.681). Major bleeding rate was higher in the ticagrelor group ( OR=1.559, 95% CI 1.130-2.150; P=0.007). Conclusion:In ACS patients with GPI, ticagrelor did not reduce MACE, but increased the major bleeding risk compared with clopidogrel.
