Background-Ticagrelor and prasugrel provide stronger platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel. Direct pharmacodynamic comparison between them has not yet been reported in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Methods and Results-In a prospective, single-center, single-blind study, 55 out of 117 (47%) screened consecutive STsegment-elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to either ticagrelor 180 mg loading followed by 90 mg bid, or prasugrel 60 mg loading followed by 10 mg od for 5 days. Platelet reactivity (PR) was assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay and the Multiplate Analyzer at 0, 1, 2, 6, 24 hours, and 5 days postrandomization.

In patients with ACS exhibiting HTPR while on clopidogrel 24 h post-PCI, ticagrelor produces a significantly higher platelet inhibition compared with prasugrel. (Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Acute Coronary Syndromes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; NCT01360437).

AimsPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the optimal treatment for patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). An elevated index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) reflects microvascular function and when measured after PPCI, it can predict an adverse clinical outcome. We measured coronary microvascular function in STEMI patients and compared sequential changes before and after stent implantation.Methods and resultsIn 85 STEMI patients, fractional flow reserve, coronary flow reserve, and IMR were measured using a pressure wire (Certus, St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN, USA) immediately before and after stent implantation. Stenting significantly improved all of the measured parameters of coronary physiology including IMR from 67.7 [interquartile range (IQR): 56.2–95.8] to 36.7 (IQR: 22.7–59.5), P < 0.001. However, after stenting, IMR remained elevated (>40) in 28 (32.9%) patients. In 15 of these patients (17.6% of the cohort), only a partial reduction in IMR occurred and these patients were more likely to be late presenters (pain to wire time >6 h). The extent of jeopardized myocardium [standardized beta: −0.26 (IMR unit/Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation score unit), P: 0.009] and pre-stenting IMR [standardized beta: −0.34 (IMR unit), P: 0.001] predicted a reduction in IMR after stenting (ΔIMR = post-stenting IMR − pre-stenting IMR), whereas thrombotic burden [standardized beta: 0.24 (IMR unit/thrombus score unit), P: 0.01] and deployed stent volume [standardized beta: 0.26 (IMR unit/mm3 of stent), P: 0.01] were associated with a potentially deleterious increase in IMR.ConclusionImproved perfusion of the myocardium by stent deployment during PPCI is not universal. The causes of impaired microvascular function at the completion of PPCI treatment are heterogeneous, but can reflect a later clinical presentation and/or the location and extent of the thrombotic burden.

In patients with HTPR after PCI, prasugrel is more effective compared with high clopidogrel in reducing platelet reactivity, particularly in CYP2C19*2 carriers. Genotyping guidance might be helpful only in case an increased clopidogrel maintenance dose is considered. (Prasugrel Versus High Dose Clopidogrel in Clopidogrel Resistant Patients Post Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI); NCT01109784).