You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Commentary
General medicine
Risk score identifies patients who will benefit from prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy
  1. Kamil F Faridi,
  2. Robert W Yeh
  1. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Robert W Yeh, Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Ryeh{at}bidmc.harvard.edu

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2017-110822

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Piccolo R, Gargiulo G, Franzone A, et al. Use of the dual-antiplatelet therapy score to guide treatment duration after percutaneous coronary intervention. Ann Intern Med 2017;167:17–25.

    Context

    Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a P2Y12 inhibitor and aspirin is standard of care following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), though optimal duration remains uncertain. The DAPT Score was developed using the DAPT Study to help decide between 12 months or 30 months of therapy in patients without major bleeding or ischaemic events 1 year after PCI.1 This study by Piccolo et al 2 evaluated whether the DAPT Score would be similarly helpful for patients 6 months after PCI using data from the Prolonging Dual-Antiplatelet Treatment After Grading Stent-Induced Intimal Hyperplasia (PRODIGY) clinical trial.

    Methods

    Investigators evaluated 1970 patients undergoing PCI in the PRODIGY trial. Patients were randomly assigned to one of four stent types …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors KFF and RWY contributed to the supervision, drafting and critical revision of this manuscript.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.