Abstract
Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) need adequate antithrombotic protection. We aim to compare the clinical outcomes between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in these patients. In total, 336 patients with ACS and LV dysfunction who undergoing PCI were included in this retrospective observational study. Of these, 137 received clopidogrel and 199 received ticagrelor. There was a 6-month follow-up period during which clinical outcomes were monitored. The incidence of the composite endpoint (23.1% vs 13.9%, P = .041) and bleeding events (6.5% vs 1.5%, P = .027) in the ticagrelor group were significantly higher compared to the clopidogrel group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that age (P = .006), hypertension (P = .007), liver insufficiency (P = .022), previous MI (P = .014) and ticagrelor (P = .044) were independent risk factors that affect the efficacy outcome. Age (P = .027) and ticagrelor (P = .016) were the independent risk factors for the safety outcome. Furthermore, in Cox survival regression analysis model, the survival rate of the efficacy endpoint in the clopidogrel group was seemingly higher than in the ticagrelor group (HR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.97-2.90, P = .065). The survival rate of the bleeding endpoint in the clopidogrel group was higher than in the ticagrelor group (HR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.17-3.40, P = .011). Compared to clopidogrel, ticagrelor showed increased risk of efficacy outcome and major bleeding events during 6-month follow-up in patients with ACS and LV dysfunction undergoing PCI.