Prasugrel vs clopidogrel in cardiogenic shock patients undergoing primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction

Summary

There is limited clinical data comparing different P2Y₁₂-receptor inhibitors in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock. The aim of the ISAR-SHOCK registry was to compare the clinical outcome of patients treated with clopidogrel vs prasugrel in this setting. Patients (n=145) with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock and undergoing primary PCI in two centres (Deutsches Herzzentrum München and Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University Munich) between January 2009 and May 2012 were included in this registry. The use of prasugrel for patients within this registry reflected co-morbidities and platelet function testing results during the acute AMI phase. Early outcome at 30-days was reported with regard to all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding events. With regard to antiplatelet treatment in the 145 cardiogenic shock patients, 50 patients were initially treated or immediately switched to prasugrel while 95 patients were treated with clopidogrel. All-cause mortality was lower in prasugrelvs clopidogrel-treated patients (30 % vs 50.5%, HR: 0.51, 95% CI [0.29–0.92], p=0.025). No significant differences in prasugrel- vs clopidogrel-treated patients were observed for the occurrence of MI (p=0.233), ST (p=0.306) or TIMI major bleedings (p=0.571). Results of the ISAR-SHOCK registry suggest that the use of prasugrel in AMI patients complicated by cardiogenic shock might be associated with a lower mortality risk as compared to clopidogrel therapy without increasing the risk of bleeding. These findings, however, need confirmation from specifically designed randomised studies in this high-risk cohort of patients.

Keywords

Clopidogrel - prasugrel - cardiogenic shock - bleeding - mortality

• References

• 1 Steg PG, James SK. et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2012; 33: 2569-2619.
• 2 Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N. et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 2501-2555.
• 3 Muller I, Seyfarth M, Rudiger S. et al. Effect of a high loading dose of clopidogrel on platelet function in patients undergoing coronary stent placement. Heart 2001; 85: 92-93.
• 4 Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Hiatt BL. et al. Clopidogrel for coronary stenting: response variability, drug resistance, and the effect of pretreatment platelet reactivity. Circulation 2003; 107: 2908-2913.
• 5 Tantry US, Bonello L, Aradi D. et al. Consensus and update on the definition of on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate associated with ischemia and bleeding. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 62: 2261-2273.
• 6 Sibbing D, Braun S, Morath T. et al. Platelet reactivity after clopidogrel treatment assessed with point-of-care analysis and early drug-eluting stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53: 849-856.
• 7 Baue AE, Faist E, Fry D. Multiple organ failure - pathopyhsiology, prevention and therapy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York; 2000. 2000; XXII: 712 p.
• 8 Osmancik P, Jirmar R, Hulikova K. et al. A comparison of the VASP index between patients with hemodynamically complicated and uncomplicated acute myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2010; 75: 158-166.
• 9 Bjelland TW, Hjertner O, Klepstad P. et al. Antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel is reduced in patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2010; 81: 1627-1631.
• 10 Ibrahim K, Christoph M, Schmeinck S. et al. High rates of prasugrel and ticagrelor non-responder in patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2014; 85: 649-656.
• 11 Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH. et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2001-2015.
• 12 Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A. et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1045-1057.
• 13 Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann FJ. et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 1287-1296.
• 14 Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG. et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 625-634.
• 15 Mayer K, Schulz S, Bernlochner I. et al. A comparative cohort study on person-alised antiplatelet therapy in PCI-treated patients with high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity. Results of the ISAR-HPR registry. Thromb Haemost 2014; 112: 342-351.
• 16 Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R. et al. Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation 2007; 115: 2344-2351.
• 17 Bonello L, Tantry US, Marcucci R. et al. Consensus and future directions on the definition of high on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 919-933.
• 18 Sibbing D, Schulz S, Braun S. et al. Antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel and bleeding in patients undergoing coronary stent placement. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 08: 250-256.
• 19 Sibbing D, Steinhubl SR, Schulz S. et al. Platelet aggregation and its association with stent thrombosis and bleeding in clopidogrel-treated patients: initial evidence of a therapeutic window. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 317-318.
• 20 TRIUMPH Investigators. Alexander JH, Reynolds HR. et al. Effect of tilarginine acetate in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: the TRIUMPH randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc 2007; 297: 1657-1666.
• 21 Montalescot G, Wiviott SD, Braunwald E. et al. Prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (TRITON-TIMI 38): double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009; 373: 723-731.
• 22 Hasdai D, Holmes Jr. DR, Califf RM. et al. Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: predictors of death. GUSTO Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue-Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries. Am Heart J 1999; 138: 21-31.
• 23 Zeymer U, Vogt A, Zahn R. et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in 1333 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); Results of the primary PCI registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausarzte (ALKK). Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 322-328.
• 24 Bonello L, Pansieri M, Mancini J. et al. High on-treatment platelet reactivity after prasugrel loading dose and cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58: 467-473.
• 25 Bhatt DL, Stone GW, Mahaffey KW. et al. Effect of platelet inhibition with cangrelor during PCI on ischemic events. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1303-1313.
• 26 Montalescot G, Bolognese L, Dudek D. et al. Pretreatment with prasugrel in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 999-1010.
• 27 Montalescot G, Lassen JF, Hamm CW. et al. Ambulance or in-catheterization laboratory administration of ticagrelor for primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the randomized, double-blind Administration of Ticagrelor in the cath Lab or in the Ambulance for New ST elevation myocardial Infarction to open the Coronary artery (ATLANTIC) study. Am Heart J 2013; 165: 515-522.
• 28 Hobl EL, Stimpfl T, Ebner J. et al. Morphine decreases clopidogrel concentrations and effects: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 630-635.