학술논문

The dogma of aspirin: a critical review of evidence on the best monotherapy after.
Document Type
Article
Source
Thrombosis Journal. 9/7/2015, Vol. 13 Issue 1, p1-5. 5p.
Subject
*ASPIRIN
*VASCULAR diseases
*ISCHEMIA prevention
*PERIPHERAL vascular disease treatment
*TREATMENT of acute coronary syndrome
*STROKE treatment
*COMBINATION drug therapy
*CORONARY disease
*MYOCARDIAL revascularization
*THROMBOSIS
*TRANSLUMINAL angioplasty
*EVIDENCE-based medicine
*TRANSIENT ischemic attack
*CLOPIDOGREL
*PLATELET aggregation inhibitors
*PREVENTION
Language
ISSN
1477-9560
Abstract
Dual antiplatelet therapy based on the combination of an adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor antagonist plus aspirin has demonstrated to be more effective in reducing the rate of major ischemic vascular events compared to aspirin monotherapy in some clinical settings. The current controversy on the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy should not conceal another major issue: the choice of the more appropriate antiplatelet monotherapy after the dual treatment phase. The aim of this article is to critically analyze the available evidence in this topic. Data from studies like CAPRIE, MATCH, PROFESS, CHANCE, DAPT and others, raise questions as why antiplatelet monotherapy after the dual phase should only be based on aspirin, in spite of a lack of evidence surprisingly not highlighted by key opinion leaders and experts. We conclude that, whether ADP-receptor antagonist rather than aspirin may be proposed as monotherapy seems not only have no answer but also not place in the current specialists' analysis, as if a dogmatic approach were prevalent. Perhaps the time for an open debate on these topics is ripe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]