ACC 2021 | ADAPTABLE: Low Doses of Aspirin Are Equally Effective and Present Lower Bleeding Risk

Patients diagnosed with cardiovascular disease taking aspirin as secondary prevention can take lower doses and achieve the same efficacy level as those taking 325 mg.

ACC 2021 | ADAPTABLE: Bajas dosis de aspirina son iguales de efectivas y con muy bajo riesgo de sangrado

According to the ADAPTABLE study, presented at the American College of Cardiology (ACC) 2021 Congress and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), both schemes were associated with a very low bleeding risk.

Results showed no difference between 81 mg and 325 mg of aspirin, which sheds light on some uncertainties about the correct dose in secondary prevention.

Some arm crossovers (mainly from 325 mg to 81 mg) could affect the power of the study, although it is surprising that, for most patients, 81 mg of aspirin is sufficient. There is still doubt regarding those currently taking 325 mg who have no reason to lower their dose to 81 mg.

The editorial accompanying this publication was highly critical of the crossover, going so far as to suggest that it is impossible to conclude that both doses are equally effective.

While the current recommendation of the European Society of Cardiology is to use low doses of aspirin as secondary prevention, the ACC/American Heart Association guidelines do not specify any dosage. Sixty percent of patients discharged after infarction in the United States are prescribed 325 mg of aspirin.


Read also: ACC 2021 | LAAOS III: Appendage Closure During Central Vascular Surgery.


The ADAPTABLE study included over 15,000 patients with cardiovascular disease who were randomized to either 81 mg or 325 mg of aspirin. One third of the patients had a history of acute myocardial infarction and more than half had a history of coronary revascularization within the previous five years.

bajas-de-AAS

Original Title: Comparative Effectiveness of Aspirin Dosing in Cardiovascular Disease.

Reference: W.S. Jones et al. Presentado en el ACC 2021 y publicado simultáneamente en NEJM. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2102137.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Coronary Artery Disease in Aortic Stenosis: CABG + SAVR vs. TAVR + PCI: Data from Spanish Centers

Multiple randomized studies have shown comparable or superior efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).  However, many of...

Evolution of Small Balloon-Expandable Valves

Small aortic rings (20 mm) have posed a significant challenge for both surgery and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to their association with an...

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 – ECLIPSE: Randomized Study of Orbital Atherectomy vs Conventional PCI in Severely Calcified Lesions

Coronary calcification is associated with stent under-expansion and increased risk of both early and late adverse events. Atherectomy is an essential tool for uncrossable...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation: Surgical vs. Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair

While highly prevalent, tricuspid regurgitation is a notably undertreated valvulopathy. Its progression has been associated with higher mortality and significant disability. According to the...

ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Post TAVR Vascular Closure Devices

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a well-established option to treat elderly patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. Technical advances and device development...

Endovascular Treatment of Iliofemoral Disease for the Improvement of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a significant risk factor in the development of difficult-to-treat conditions, such as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)....