ライフサイエンスコーパス: antiplatelet therapy

1 of the patients (all of them in patients on antiplatelet therapy).

2 r monotherapy compared with traditional dual antiplatelet therapy.

3 ional, and clinical sciences in the field of antiplatelet therapy.

4 d dipyridamole) with that of guideline-based antiplatelet therapy.

5 cker treatment, and a neutral effect of dual antiplatelet therapy.

6 h MV score could benefit from a personalized antiplatelet therapy.

7 tent (DCS) or a BMS followed by 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy.

8 n receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and dual antiplatelet therapy.

9 erent risks and benefits with prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy.

10 closure or anticoagulation, as compared with antiplatelet therapy.

11 .9% and 89.3% of patients were taking single antiplatelet therapy.

12 s comprehensive risk factor modification and antiplatelet therapy.

13 cagrelor plus ASA following 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy.

14 l outcomes than those who were not receiving antiplatelet therapy.

15 feasible approach for patients needing dual antiplatelet therapy.

16 ed with aspirin alone or short duration dual antiplatelet therapy.

17 ted patients and 25.7 for patients receiving antiplatelet therapy.

18 participants to different durations of dual antiplatelet therapy.

19 40%) did not receive standard post-TAVI dual-antiplatelet therapy.

20 l risk of ischaemic events despite receiving antiplatelet therapy.

21 ommon reason for premature cessation of dual antiplatelet therapy.

22 with those discharged on single-agent or no antiplatelet therapy.

23 patients with early discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy.

24 of approaches using anticoagulants on top of antiplatelet therapy.

25 ative patients were planned for 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy.

26 acerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy.

27 ardiovascular risk factors and unaffected by antiplatelet therapy.

28 acerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy.

29 brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy.

30 gh-content chemical library screening of new antiplatelet therapies.

31 ts with acute coronary syndrome on different antiplatelet therapies.

32 splay adverse thrombotic events with current antiplatelet therapies.

33 gh-content screening of new more efficacious antiplatelet therapies.

34 on test be used to guide the dose or type of antiplatelet therapy?

35 of major bleeding by 40% compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (1.97% versus 3.13%; hazard ratio [

36 eding were 1.13 (95% CI, 1.06-1.19) for dual antiplatelet therapy, 1.82 (95% CI, 1.76-1.89) for thera

37 [4%] of 224) than among those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (31 [15%] of 208; p<0.0001); NOACs

38 Most patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (3613 of 4527 [80%]) received low-d

39 OAC (58.0% versus 60.7%), had similar use of antiplatelet therapy (44.0% versus 41.3%) after catheter

40 ate of sICH was higher in patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (5.0% vs 3.7%).

41 rapy with P2Y12 inhibitors alone versus dual-antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndromes or c

42 etween those who were and were not receiving antiplatelet therapy after adjustment (8.0% vs 6.6%; AOR

43 The benefit and need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable scaffold implan

44 t benefit from more aggressive and prolonged antiplatelet therapy after CAS.

45 trial, compared 30 versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting.

46 In the debate about the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantati

47 ndation ("may be considered") to extend dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantati

48 ontinuation of the aspirin component of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary interve

49 Dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary interve

50 tcomes of HBR patients receiving 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary interve

51 inclusion/exclusion criteria and 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary interve

52 In the DAPT Study (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), after percutaneous coronary inter

53 rm antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group), antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet-only group), or

54 et therapy (PFO closure group) or to receive antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet-only group).

55 re combined with antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet therapy alone on the risks of recurrent str

56 f PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined d

57 the comparison of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined d

58 gulants and in 7 of 174 patients assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone.

59 latelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone.

60 latelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone; however, PFO closure was ass

61 nists could potentially be useful adducts in antiplatelet therapies and may provide a promising persp

62 elopment of strategies to improve on current antiplatelet therapies and to reduce cardiovascular dise

63 were diagnosed on CT (252 assigned to start antiplatelet therapy and 255 assigned to avoid antiplate

64 m patients with bleeding risk factors (e.g., antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation or coagulation

65 Despite modest increases in antiplatelet therapy and coronary revascularization afte

66 Continued dual antiplatelet therapy and optimal medical therapy (OMT) i

67 rs of premature discontinuation or switch of antiplatelet therapy and their association with major ad

68 apid and useful approach for monitoring both antiplatelet therapy and traumatic bleeding risk.

69 th diabetes often show hyporesponsiveness to antiplatelet therapies, and it has been suggested that h

70 eceived coronary revascularization, 22% dual-antiplatelet therapy, and 71% high-dose statin therapy v

71 ted with the decision for DAPT versus single antiplatelet therapy, and further study is required to u

72 otensin system blockers, beta-blockers, dual antiplatelet therapy, and long-term cardiovascular event

73 t era of drug-eluting stents, prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, and potent P2Y12 inhibitors are no

74 ned to 1 of 3 groups, that is, no treatment, antiplatelet therapy, and warfarin.

75 vent occurrences further solidified the dual antiplatelet therapy approach.

76 short-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) versus antiplatelet therapy (APT) following LAAC.

77 Antiplatelet therapy (APT; aspirin/clopidogrel, ticagrel

78 in what has come to be commonly called dual antiplatelet therapy, are a mainstay of treatment for pa

79 years; 65% men; 75% diabetic) received dual antiplatelet therapy as a single loading dose (ticagrelo

80 ticoagulation, empirical treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus clopidogrel) for 3 to

81 0.55%) or were not (0.52%) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge (HR, 1.04; 95

82 dherence patients described missing doses of antiplatelet therapy at least twice a week after percuta

83 De-escalation of antiplatelet therapy at the time of BARC 3 bleeding coul

84 De-escalation of antiplatelet therapy at the time of BARC 3 bleeding was

85 wever, many patients may have been receiving antiplatelet therapy before acute ischemic stroke and co

86 istry patients, 38844 (45.7%) were receiving antiplatelet therapy before admission; 46 228 patients (

87 latelet agents, and clinical indications for antiplatelet therapy before focusing on a frequent quest

88 inferior to standard care for people taking antiplatelet therapy before intracerebral haemorrhage.

89 reated with intravenous tPA, those receiving antiplatelet therapy before the stroke had a higher risk

90 Prestroke antiplatelet therapy before tPA administration for acute

91 t Therapy (DAPT) Study, continuation of dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 12 months after coronary ste

92 patient benefit and harm from continued dual antiplatelet therapy beyond assessment of MI history alo

93 erapy refers to the contemporary approach of antiplatelet therapy, blood pressure control, low-densit

94 However, antiplatelet therapy can be associated with an increased

95 Options for management include antiplatelet therapy, carotid endarterectomy and carotid

96 In 682 patients not treated with antiplatelet therapy, circulating PCSK9 and 11-dh-TxB2 w

97 loading doses and then 30 days of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin 75 mg, clopidogre

98 compare the safety and efficacy of intensive antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin, clopidogrel, and

99 bosis, any bleeding, and major bleeding with antiplatelet therapy compared with none ranged from 0.26

100 uld play a role in these late bleedings, and antiplatelet therapy could be a precipitating factor.

101 hematologists about the 2 most commonly used antiplatelet therapies: Could the patient be aspirin "re

102 recent studies, the optimum duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary drug-eluting

103 The appropriate duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DE

104 The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DE

105 The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after implantation of newer-

106 agrelor monotherapy following one-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary

107 effect of 30 months versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary

108 The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary

109 Although dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 1 year provides ische

110 es the associations between patterns of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cessation and adverse events

111 ermine the impact of baseline anemia on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cessation patterns <=2 years

112 The benefits and harms of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) continuation beyond 1 year a

113 treatment guidance endorsing shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in high bleeding ri

114 aneous coronary intervention to 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by 23-month ticagre

115 been validated in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following percutaneous coron

116 ent guidelines suggesting a benefit for dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following peripheral vascula

117 se of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for cardiovascular outcomes.

118 ice guidelines recommend post-operative dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients who undergo coro

119 nged (24 months) vs short (</=6 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with PAD undergo

120 Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is prescribed to millions of

121 Prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended after an acut

122 Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduced stroke risk in high-

123 The dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score was developed to ident

124 g patients with DM participating in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study as a prespecified anal

125 analysis is derived from data from the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study, a multicenter trial i

126 In the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study, continuation of dual

127 ommend that these patients also receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of ischem

128 lation with a vitamin K antagonist plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a P2Y12 inhibitor and a

129 Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus a P2Y12 in

130 Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibi

131 with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), yet this treatment leads to

132 tinal (GI) events in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT).

133 stents (BMS) under similar durations of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT).

134 1, n=709); rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; Group 2, n=709); and warfari

135 ct of an experimental strategy (1-month dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] followed by 23-month ticagre

136 des cardiovascular risk reduction and use of antiplatelet therapy, depending on myeloproliferative ne

137 ts with recent cerebral ischaemia, intensive antiplatelet therapy did not reduce the incidence and se

138 Concomitant antiplatelet therapy doubled the risk of CSH during devi

139 -phase cardiovascular benefit of potent dual antiplatelet therapy driven largely by reducing de novo

140 eluting stents, which require prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy due to the increased risk of late a

141 tool (DAPT score) aids prescription of dual antiplatelet therapy duration in patients with or withou

142 e ischemic and bleeding risks to inform dual antiplatelet therapy duration showed modest accuracy in

143 neration and BMS, thus allowing shorter dual antiplatelet therapy duration.

144 nted to further define optimal management of antiplatelet therapy during anticoagulation in surgical

145 , with aspirin or a P2Y(12) inhibitor), dual antiplatelet therapy (eg, aspirin combined with a P2Y(12

146 uch antithrombotic strategies include single antiplatelet therapy (eg, with aspirin or a P2Y(12) inhi

147 d myocardial infarctions with prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, findings that support the new Clas

148 For patients on dual antiplatelet therapy followed for 1 year, the hazard rat

149 asis on reduced duration and/or intensity of antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary int

150 clinical and genetic factors when selecting antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary int

151 Advances in antiplatelet therapies for patients with cardiovascular

152 In patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy for at least 1 year after coronary

153 l haemorrhage symptom onset if they had used antiplatelet therapy for at least 7 days beforehand and

154 receiving either routine anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy for existing conditions prior to be

155 sion, diabetes mellitus and lipid disorders, antiplatelet therapy for high vascular risk patients, an

156 We therefore recommend serial imaging and antiplatelet therapy for iBCVI.

157 Ticagrelor is an effective antiplatelet therapy for patients with coronary atherosc

158 ifically the selection of anticoagulation vs antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention.

159 ded, randomized placebo-controlled trials of antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of ischemic even

160 risk of VTE by 29% compared with background antiplatelet therapy, from 0.93% to 0.64% at 3 years (ha

161 equired brain MRI protocol (122 in the start antiplatelet therapy group and 132 in the avoid antiplat

162 latelet therapy group, 1540 in the guideline antiplatelet therapy group) were recruited from 106 hosp

163 iplatelet therapy group and 132 in the avoid antiplatelet therapy group).

164 3096 participants (1556 in the intensive antiplatelet therapy group, 1540 in the guideline antipl

165 1, n=709); rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus dual antiplatelet therapy (group 2, n=709); and warfarin plus

166 apy (group 2, n=709); and warfarin plus dual antiplatelet therapy (group 3, n=706).

167 Net costs were calculated between antiplatelet therapy groups according to level of ischem

168 However, patients receiving antiplatelet therapy had a greater risk-adjusted likelih

169 However, dual antiplatelet therapy has been preliminarily associated w

170 Sex-specific differences in response to antiplatelet therapies have been described.

171 Antiplatelet therapies have been proposed for the treatm

172 etes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low

173 runs, earlier date of procedure, and no dual antiplatelet therapy; high pre-TAVR aortic peak gradient

174 ng or MI rate, compared with continuation of antiplatelet therapy (HR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.11-0.92]; P=0.

175 0.71%) or were not (0.69%) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.54-1.95).

176 0.04), and premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (HR=2.67, P=0.003); high platelet r

177 trials evaluating the risks and benefits of antiplatelet therapies in patients with atherosclerosis.

178 on and symptoms of claudication was low: any antiplatelet therapy in 35.7% (standard error [SE]: 2.7%

179 ble evidence about the risk-benefit ratio of antiplatelet therapy in adults with ET is highly uncerta

180 evidence of heterogeneity in the effects of antiplatelet therapy in any exploratory subgroup analyse

181 ctiveness of 1-month DAPT followed by single antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients undergoing percutan

182 attractive alternative to blocking PAR1 for antiplatelet therapy in humans.

183 d therapy was superior to warfarin plus dual antiplatelet therapy in lowering bleeding outcomes regar

184 ctical strategies for managing perioperative antiplatelet therapy in patients following percutaneous

185 clinical trials comparing anticoagulation to antiplatelet therapy in secondary stroke prevention.

186 Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhan

187 occurred in patients who had suspended dual antiplatelet therapy, in 6 cases prematurely.

188 ssist device support; yet, their relation to antiplatelet therapy, including aspirin (ASA) dosing, is

189 Tailoring antiplatelet therapy intensity to patient risk may impro

190 aspirin, we aimed to establish whether dual antiplatelet therapy involving cilostazol is safe and ap

191 A limitation of current antiplatelet therapies is their inability to separate th

192 ies acute coronary syndromes, and therefore, antiplatelet therapy is an important foundation in the t

193 ts prospectively and prescribing alternative antiplatelet therapy is beneficial.

194 ntion of coronary artery disease (CAD), oral antiplatelet therapy is essential.

195 ase of coronary intervention, temporary dual antiplatelet therapy is mandatory as well.

196 Antiplatelet therapy is of proven benefit in coronary ar

197 Antiplatelet therapy is preferred for lesions characteri

198 Although dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended, single antiplatelet

199 ed with biolimus-A9 followed by 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy is safer and more effective than a

200 Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay for the treatment o

201 Anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy is the preferred treatment option f

202 er OMT modifies the treatment effect of dual antiplatelet therapy is unknown.

203 Antithrombotic (anticoagulant or antiplatelet) therapy is withheld from some patients wit

204 of DAPT after the procedure, and longer dual antiplatelet therapy (L-DAPT) was defined as the per-pro

205 More potent and longer antiplatelet therapy may be beneficial for patients unde

206 The benefits and risks of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy may be different for patients with

207 y intracerebral haemorrhage in people taking antiplatelet therapy might reduce death or dependence by

208 from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent

209 als in the UK that assessed whether starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent

210 for shortening the minimum duration of dual antiplatelet therapy needed after coronary intervention.

211 ference in the likelihood of prescription of antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.6

212 AD and CAD were more likely to be prescribed antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio [OR]: 2.6; 95% confiden

213 e comparison of the current standard of dual antiplatelet therapy of aspirin with clopidogrel versus

214 tiplatelet therapy and 255 assigned to avoid antiplatelet therapy, of whom one withdrew and was not a

215 s to: (1) evaluate the effect of concomitant antiplatelet therapy on CSH, and (2) understand the rela

216 assess the effect of extended duration dual antiplatelet therapy on mortality by doing a meta-analys

217 lude all but a very modest harmful effect of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrh

218 ally or statistically significant hazards of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrh

219 sought to examine the effect of more potent antiplatelet therapy on the basis of the timing and etio

220 botic therapy (27.1% [95% CI, 26.6%-27.7%]), antiplatelet therapy only (24.8% [95% CI, 24.3%-25.3%]),

221 rombotic therapy (9.3% [95% CI, 8.9%-9.6%]), antiplatelet therapy only (8.1% [95% CI, 7.8%-8.3%]), or

222 time of stroke, 37674 (39.9%) were receiving antiplatelet therapy only, and 28583 (30.3%) were not re

223 extended duration versus short duration dual antiplatelet therapy or aspirin alone.

224 cannot tolerate or have contraindications to antiplatelet therapy or in the setting of a subarachnoid

225 to oral anticoagulation and used only single antiplatelet therapy or nothing.

226 antiplatelet therapy is recommended, single antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation is frequent

227 py with more potent antiplatelet drugs, dual antiplatelet therapy, or vitamin K antagonists further r

228 in a 2:1 ratio, to undergo PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group) or to receive a

229 to transcatheter PFO closure plus long-term antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group), antiplatelet t

230 ly been studied in addition to aspirin; dual-antiplatelet therapy proved superiority compared with as

231 s of platelet dysfunction and currently used antiplatelet therapies provide a framework for understan

232 ed duration versus no or short duration dual antiplatelet therapy, published before Oct 1, 2014.

233 ternative noncontraindicated treatment or to antiplatelet therapy (randomization groups 2 and 3).

234 is, any bleeding, and major bleeding without antiplatelet therapy ranged from 5 to 110 (median, 20),

235 with 12 months of therapy, 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy reduced the risk of stent thrombosi

236 Dual antiplatelet therapy reduces ischemic events in cardiova

237 More intensive antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of VTE.

238 mptomatic atherosclerosis and more intensive antiplatelet therapy reduces VTE risk beyond aspirin mon

239 Postdischarge antiplatelet therapy regimen rates were determined (none

240 d to identify patients with ACS who, despite antiplatelet therapy, remain at high cardiovascular risk

241 e comparable benefit from intensification of antiplatelet therapy remains uncertain.

242 n receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and dual antiplatelet therapy, respectively.

243 of DAPT after DES implantation: shorter dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) was defined as the per-pro

244 with a novel oral anticoagulant plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) reduces bleeding or cardiova

245 Triple antiplatelet therapy should not be used in routine clini

246 he proportion of visits with medication use (antiplatelet therapy, statins, angiotensin-converting en

247 New data from long-term dual antiplatelet therapy studies and investigations of antic

248 (The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study [DAPT Study]; NCT00977938).

249 The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study, a randomized double-blind, p

250 ipating versus not participating in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study.

251 f which 309 (24.2%) participated in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study.

252 (The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study; NCT00977938).

253 The DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) study enrolled patients after coro

254 The DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) Study, a double-blind trial, rando

255 those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antipl

256 those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antipl

257 f patients with 0, 1, 2, or 3 factors (i.e., antiplatelet therapy, thrombopenia [< 150 G/L], and prev

258 nts (1:1; stratified by hospital and type of antiplatelet therapy) to receive either standard care or

259 ntaneous Cerebral Hemorrhage Associated With Antiplatelet Therapy trial, our results suggest no hemos

260 er intracerebral haemorrhage associated with antiplatelet therapy use.

261 lusions regarding the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy varied depending on analytic techni

262 ated the effect of PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet therapy alone o

263 Meta-analysis of dual antiplatelet therapy versus monotherapy with P2Y12 inhib

264 randomly assigned to either anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy versus placebo or no treatment.

265 More intensive antiplatelet therapy (vorapaxar and ticagrelor pooled) s

266 eding use of therapeutic warfarin, NOACs, or antiplatelet therapy was associated with lower odds of m

267 By contrast, intensive antiplatelet therapy was associated with more, and more

268 Extended duration dual antiplatelet therapy was not associated with a differenc

269 Antiplatelet therapy was used in 67.9% of the population

270 tion (both NOACs and warfarin), but not dual antiplatelet therapy, was effective in prevention or tre

271 on, and patients with an indication for dual antiplatelet therapy were excluded.

272 Patients receiving antiplatelet therapy were older (median [25th-75th perce

273 tive patients were planned for 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy, whereas troponin-negative patients

274 n, but their use necessitates prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, which increases costs and bleeding

275 e than adults without diabetes, yet standard antiplatelet therapy, which is the cornerstone for prima

276 Perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy, which necessitates concomitant eva

277 The observation that dual antiplatelet therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and clopi

278 The comparison of PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy with antiplatelet therapy alone was

279 Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y(12) inhibito

280 Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor

281 Dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel after

282 Although dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel reduce

283 t (DES) implantation require additional dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel.

284 post hoc analysis of the Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents (ADAPT-DES

285 The Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents (ADAPT-DES

286 d in the ADAPT-DES study (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) according

287 rformed in the ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) registry.

288 he prospective ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) study was

289 ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a lar

290 ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a pro

291 METHODS AND ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a pro

292 ticenter ADAPT-DES study (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) were stra

293 ROMETHEUS, ADAPT-DES [the Assessment of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy with Drug-Eluting Stents], THIN [Th

294 investigation includes evaluation of single-antiplatelet therapy with P2Y12 inhibitors alone versus

295 The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel after TAXUS Liberte

296 rial comparing point-of-care genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy with routine care to determine whet

297 Intensive antiplatelet therapy with three agents might be more eff

298 tation after loading and maintenance of dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and the influence o

299 of this study was to determine the effect of antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor on recurrent ischem

300 ronary stenting and completed 1 year of dual antiplatelet therapy without major bleeding or ischemic

301 reased risk of bleeding compared with single antiplatelet therapy without significant ischemic benefi