Ticagrelor vs clopidogrel when coadministered with bivalirudin in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background:The optimal perioperative antithrombotic strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial. Objectives:To determine the safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin plus ticagrelor vs bivalirudin plus clopidogrel in patients with ACS undergoing PCI in the real world. Methods:Between March 2016 and March 2019, 7234 patients with ACS who had undergone PCI, received bivalirudin periprocedurally, and were prescribed ticagrelor or clopidogrel were enrolled in a single-center, all-comer, modern, retrospective cohort study. Incidence rates of 12-month ischemia (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), all-cause death, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2,3,5 bleeding, and BARC type 3,5 bleeding were compared between different groups. Results:In total, 4960 patients received bivalirudin plus clopidogrel and 2274 patients received bivalirudin plus ticagrelor. Compared with bivalirudin plus clopidogrel, bivalirudin plus ticagrelor was associated with lower ischemic events (1.74% vs 2.84%; relative risk, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.91; P = .02) and stroke (0.05% vs 1.01%, P < .001) within 12 months after PCI without excessive risk of bleeding (BARC type 2,3,5 bleeding: 4.49% vs 3.76%, P = .22; BARC type 3,5 bleeding: 2.84% vs 2.02%, P = .08). The beneficial effects of bivalirudin plus ticagrelor were consistent among subgroups. Conclusion:As an initial treatment strategy, bivalirudin plus ticagrelor could reduce the 12-month risk of ischemic events compared with bivalirudin plus clopidogrel significantly without increasing the bleeding risk in ACS patients undergoing PCI.