647 COMPLEX PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION IN HIGHT BLEEDING AND THROMBOTIC RISK PATIENT: WHICH ANTITHROMBOTIC THERAPY?
Authors: Mauro Maria Sara , Agnello Federica , Finocchiaro Simone , Legnazzi Marco , Scalia Lorenzo , Capodanno Davide , Tamburino Corrado 
Published: December 2022

Background

Antiplatelet therapy is required in patients with atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Current European and American guidelines recommend 6 months of DAPT in CCS and 12 months after ACS. However, a shorter duration of DAPT may be considered in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients, and a longer duration in those at higher thrombotic risk (HTR). To minimize the risk of thrombotic and bleeding events of an individual patient and therefore improve the overall outcomes of PCI, risk stratification is essential. In particular, bleeding and thrombotic characteristics must be weighed on a case-by-case basis to tailor antiplatelet therapy strategies and decisions over a patient's individual risk profile. We describe an illustrative case of complex PCI in patient with ACS in which defining the appropriate duration of DAPT is a clinical challenge.

Clinical case

A 68-year-old man with ACS-NSTEMI and anemia was hospitalized in intensive care unit. His medical history was notable for hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, diabetic retinopathy, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. A transthoracic echocardiogram showed left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% with diffuse hypokinesia, without relevant valvular disease. He was conducted to the cath-lab for a diagnostic coronary angiogram which showed a three-vessel critical CAD. After Heart Team evaluation coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) was indicated. However, during the hospitalization in intensive care unit there was a worsening of clinical conditions with cognitive impairment due to mesencephalic stroke leading to a new Heart Team assessment that indicated PCI after stabilization of clinical scenario. After two weeks patient was conducted to the cath-lab to undergoing an IVUS guided PCI. PCI of the right coronary artery was performed with implantation of 1 DES (3.0/30 mm) on the middle segment and 1 DES (4.0/15 mm) on the ostial segment. PCI of the left main bifurcation was performed with implantation of 2 DES (4.0/28 mm) with culotte technique. Patients have both HBR and HTR, therefore, after procedure, the new trade off model score introduced by the Academic Research Consoritum (ARC) was applied. Based on his risk factor, the predicted 1-y risk of BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding (51.41%) was greater than the predicted 1-y risk of myocardial infarction or stroke (25.00%). Based on this result we decided to prescribe Triple antithrombotic therapy for 1 week, dual antithrombotic therapy for 12 months and after only oral anticoagulation.

Conclusion

In the context of patient with several risk factor undergoing complex PCI the stratification of bleeding and thrombotic individual risk is mandatory to define the appropriate duration of DAPT. The new trade-off model score is an important useful tool to identify patients who might benefit from individualized DAPT durations depending on the balance between HBR and HTR characteristics.