Real clinical experiences of dual versus triple antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention

Objectives: We aimed to assess the impact of omitting aspirin on clinical outcomes in a real-world collective of patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy who were treated with a current-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) or an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS). Background: Limited data are available regarding the clinical benefit of triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) with aspirin compared with dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) without aspirin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and requiring OAC. Methods: In total, 237 patients were analyzed. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) within 1 year after PCI. Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary endpoint, cardiovascular death, and any bleeding according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) or Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria. Results: Eighty-nine patients (37.6%) received DAT, and 148 (62.4%) received TAT. The rate of MACCE was significantly higher in DAT patients than in TAT patients (16 (18%) vs. 11 (7.4%); hazard ratio [HR] 2.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24–6.03; P = 0.01). The results of the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model including corrections for imbalances in baseline characteristics confirmed a significant independent association between DAT and MACCE (HR_adj 3.14, 95% CI 1.31–7.54; P = 0.01). Major bleeding did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Conclusion: DAT was associated with a significantly higher rate of MACCE than TAT after DES or BVS implantation. Further studies are required to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dual versus TAT after PCI in clinical practice.