Evidence for the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) in the management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is from the era of either limited utilization of P2Y12 inhibitors or prior the introduction of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors. This leads to divergent opinions regarding the role of these agents in contemporary practice. This study sought the opinion of cardiovascular clinical pharmacists regarding the role of GPIs in the modern of ACS management. A 13-question survey was created and distributed from June 2018 to July 2018 via the American College of Clinical Pharmacy's Cardiology Practice and Research Network e-mail listserv. The survey consisted of questions regarding the ideal use of GPIs in ACS management, preferred agent selection, and rational for selection. All results were analyzed with descriptive statistics. There were a total 69 responses of 1175 (response rate 5.9%). The majority felt there was still a role for GPI in accordance to the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (65.2%), with eptifibatide being preferred (55.1%). For non-ST-segment myocardial infraction (NSTEMI), only 49.3% felt role of GPI was in line with the ACC/AHA guidelines, but a notable number of respondents felt GPIs were only indicated in NSTEMI patients for bailout or thrombotic complications (18.8%). A majority (56.5%) felt GPIs could be used as an alternative for cangrelor when bridging. The decision to use one agent over another were efficacy data, cost, and pharmacokinetic profile.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0897190019872386 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!