The presence of coronary artery calcification (CAC) increases with age, leading to a higher number and complexity of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures in older patients. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and diabetes are also associated with the development of CAC. These significant comorbidities, combined with PCI of severely calcified lesions, pose major challenges due to technical difficulties and potentially compromise both short- and long-term outcomes. Patients undergoing PCI for heavily calcified lesions should receive optimal anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy according to current guidelines. However, data on the potential use of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor, prasugrel) instead of clopidogrel as standard practice in elective PCI of CAC are limited. This is due to varying classifications used to define complex PCI in meta-analyses, and the extreme heterogeneity of the populations studied in terms of clinical presentation. The duration of antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor can be prolonged in selected patients. However, there is increasing evidence supporting the validity of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after standard DAPT, adopting an aspirin-free and tailored de-escalation strategy.
Citation: Giulia Alagna, Alessia Cascone, Antonino Micari, Giancarlo Trimarchi, Francesca Campanella, Giovanni Taverna, Saro Pistorio, Giuseppe Andò. Type and duration of antithrombotic therapy after treatment of severely calcified lesions[J]. AIMS Medical Science, 2025, 12(1): 38-62. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2025004
[1] | Veliappan Vijayaraj, Chokkalingam Ravichandran, Thongchai Botmart, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Kasthurisamy Jothimani . Existence and data dependence results for neutral fractional order integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1055-1071. doi: 10.3934/math.2023052 |
[2] | Mohammed A. Almalahi, Satish K. Panchal, Fahd Jarad, Mohammed S. Abdo, Kamal Shah, Thabet Abdeljawad . Qualitative analysis of a fuzzy Volterra-Fredholm integrodifferential equation with an Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 15994-16016. doi: 10.3934/math.2022876 |
[3] | Muneerah AL Nuwairan, Ahmed Gamal Ibrahim . The weighted generalized Atangana-Baleanu fractional derivative in banach spaces- definition and applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 36293-36335. doi: 10.3934/math.20241722 |
[4] | Ismail Gad Ameen, Dumitru Baleanu, Hussien Shafei Hussien . Efficient method for solving nonlinear weakly singular kernel fractional integro-differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15819-15836. doi: 10.3934/math.2024764 |
[5] | Muhammad Farman, Ali Akgül, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Dilshad Ahmad, Aqeel Ahmad, Sarfaraz Kamangar, C Ahamed Saleel . Epidemiological analysis of fractional order COVID-19 model with Mittag-Leffler kernel. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 756-783. doi: 10.3934/math.2022046 |
[6] | Muhammad Imran Asjad, Waqas Ali Faridi, Adil Jhangeer, Maryam Aleem, Abdullahi Yusuf, Ali S. Alshomrani, Dumitru Baleanu . Nonlinear wave train in an inhomogeneous medium with the fractional theory in a plane self-focusing. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 8290-8313. doi: 10.3934/math.2022462 |
[7] | Iman Ben Othmane, Lamine Nisse, Thabet Abdeljawad . On Cauchy-type problems with weighted R-L fractional derivatives of a function with respect to another function and comparison theorems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14106-14129. doi: 10.3934/math.2024686 |
[8] | Kishor D. Kucche, Sagar T. Sutar, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar . Analysis of nonlinear implicit fractional differential equations with the Atangana-Baleanu derivative via measure of non-compactness. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27058-27079. doi: 10.3934/math.20241316 |
[9] | Miguel Vivas-Cortez, Muhammad Uzair Awan, Sehrish Rafique, Muhammad Zakria Javed, Artion Kashuri . Some novel inequalities involving Atangana-Baleanu fractional integral operators and applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12203-12226. doi: 10.3934/math.2022678 |
[10] | Ravi Agarwal, Snezhana Hristova, Donal O'Regan . Integral presentations of the solution of a boundary value problem for impulsive fractional integro-differential equations with Riemann-Liouville derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2973-2988. doi: 10.3934/math.2022164 |
The presence of coronary artery calcification (CAC) increases with age, leading to a higher number and complexity of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures in older patients. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and diabetes are also associated with the development of CAC. These significant comorbidities, combined with PCI of severely calcified lesions, pose major challenges due to technical difficulties and potentially compromise both short- and long-term outcomes. Patients undergoing PCI for heavily calcified lesions should receive optimal anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy according to current guidelines. However, data on the potential use of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor, prasugrel) instead of clopidogrel as standard practice in elective PCI of CAC are limited. This is due to varying classifications used to define complex PCI in meta-analyses, and the extreme heterogeneity of the populations studied in terms of clinical presentation. The duration of antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor can be prolonged in selected patients. However, there is increasing evidence supporting the validity of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after standard DAPT, adopting an aspirin-free and tailored de-escalation strategy.
Fractional differential equations are thought to be the most effective models for a variety of pertinent events. This makes it possible to investigate the existence, uniqueness, controllability, stability, and other properties of analytical solutions. For example, applying conservation laws to the fractional Black-Scholes equation in Lie symmetry analysis, finding existence solutions for some conformable differential equations, and finding existence solutions for some classical and fractional differential equations on the basis of discrete symmetry analysis, for more details, see [1,2,3,4,5].
Atangana and Baleanu unified and extended the definition of Caputo-Fabrizio [5] by introducing exciting derivatives without singular kernel. Also, the same authors presented the derivative containing Mittag-Leffler function as a nonlocal and nonsingular kernel. Many researchers showed their interest in this definition because it opens many and sober directions and carries Riemann-Liouville and Caputo derivatives [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13].
A variety of problems in economic theory, control theory, global analysis, fractional analysis, and nonlinear analysis have been treated by fixed point (FP) theory. The FP method contributes greatly to the fractional differential/integral equations, through which it is possible to study the existence and uniqueness of the solution to such equations [14,15,16,17]. Also, this topic has been densely studied and several significant results have been recorded in [18,19,20,21].
The concepts of mixed monotone property (MMP) and a coupled fixed point (CFP) for a contractive mapping Ξ:χ×χ→χ, where χ is a partially ordered metric space (POMS) have been initiated by Bhaskar and Lakshmikantham [22]. To support these ideas, they presented some CFP theorems and determined the existence and uniqueness of the solution to a periodic boundary value problem [23,24,25]. Many authors worked in this direction and obtained some nice results concerned with CFPs in various spaces [26,27,28].
Definition 1.1. [22] Consider a set χ≠∅. A pair (a,b)∈χ×χ is called a CFP of the mapping Ξ:χ×χ→χ if a=Ξ(a,b) and b=Ξ(b,a).
Definition 1.2. [22] Assume that (χ,≤) is a partially ordered set and Ξ:χ×χ→χ is a given mapping. We say that Ξ has a MMP if for any a,b∈χ,
a1,a2∈χ, a1≤a2⇒Ξ(a1,b)≤Ξ(a2,b), |
and
b1,b2∈χ, b1≤b2⇒Ξ(a,b1)≥Ξ(a,b2). |
Theorem 1.1. [22] Let (χ,≤,d) be a complete POMS and Ξ:χ×χ→χ be a continuous mapping having the MMP on χ. Assume that there is a τ∈[0,1) so that
d(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))≤τ2(d(a,k)+d(b,l)), |
for all a≥k and b≤l. If there are a0,b0∈χ so that a0≤Ξ(a0,b0) and b0≥Ξ(b0,a0), then Ξ has a CFP, that is, there exist a0,b0∈χ such that a=Ξ(a,b) and b=Ξ(b,a).
The same authors proved that Theorem 1.1 is still valid if we replace the hypothesis of continuity with the following: Assume χ has the property below:
(†) if a non-decreasing sequence {am}→a, then am≤a for all m;
(‡) if a non-increasing sequence {bm}→b, then b≤bm for all m.
The following auxiliary results are taken from [29,30], which are used efficiently in the next section.
Let Θ represent a family of non-decreasing functions θ:[0,∞)→[0,∞) so that ∑∞m=1θm(τ)<∞ for all τ>0, where θn is the n-th iterate of θ justifying:
(i) θ(τ)=0⇔τ=0;
(ii) for all τ>0, θ(τ)<τ;
(iii) for all τ>0, lims→τ+θ(s)<τ.
Lemma 1.1. [30] If θ:[0,∞)→[0,∞) is right continuous and non-decreasing, then limm→∞θm(τ)=0 for all τ≥0 iff θ(τ)<τ for all τ>0.
Let ˜L be the set of all functions ˜ℓ:[0,∞)→[0,1) which verify the condition:
limm→∞˜ℓ(τm)=1 implies limm→∞τm=0. |
Recently, Samet et al. [29] reported exciting FP results by presenting the concept of α-θ-contractive mappings.
Definition 1.3. [29] Let χ be a non empty-set, Ξ:χ→χ be a map and α:χ×χ→R be a given function. Then, Ξ is called α-admissible if
α(a,b)≥1⇒α(Ξa,Ξb))≥1, ∀a,b∈χ. |
Definition 1.4. [29] Let (χ,d) be a metric space. Ξ:χ→χ is called an α-θ-contractive mapping, if there exist two functions α:χ×χ→[0,+∞) and θ∈Θ such that
α(a,b)d(Ξ(a,b))≤θ(d(a,b)), |
for all a,b∈χ.
Theorem 1.2. [29] Let (χ,d) be a metric space, Ξ:χ→χ be an α-ψ-contractive mapping justifying the hypotheses below:
(i) Ξ is α-admissible;
(ii) there is a0∈χ so that α(a0,Ξa0)≥1;
(iii) Ξ is continuous.
Then Ξ has a FP.
Moreover, the authors in [29] showed that Theorem 1.2 is also true if we use the following condition instead of the continuity of the mapping Ξ.
● If {am} is a sequence of χ so that α(am,am+1)≥1 for all m and limm→+∞am=a∈χ, then for all m, α(am,a)≥1.
The idea of an α-admissible mapping has spread widely, and the FPs obtained under this idea are not small, for example, see [31,32,33,34].
Furthermore, one of the interesting directions for obtaining FPs is to introduce the idea of Geraghty contractions [30]. The author [30] generalized the Banach contraction principle and obtained some pivotal results in a complete metric space. It is worth noting that a good number of researchers have focused their attention on this idea, for example, see [35,36,37]. In respect of completeness, we state Geraghty's theorem.
Theorem 1.3. [30] Let Ξ:χ→χ be an operator on a complete metric space (χ,d). Then Ξ has a unique FP if Ξ satisfies the following inequality:
d(Ξa,Ξb)≤˜ℓ(d(a,b))d(a,b), for any a,b∈χ, |
where ˜ℓ∈˜L.
We need the following results in the last part.
Definition 1.5. [5] Let σ∈H1(s,t), s<t, and ν∈[0,1). The Atangana–Baleanu fractional derivative in the Caputo sense of σ of order ν is described by
(ABCsDνσ)(ζ)=Q(ν)1−νζ∫sσ′(ϑ)Mν(−ν(ζ−ϑ)ν1−ν)dϑ, |
where Mν is the Mittag-Leffler function given by Mν(r)=∞∑m=0rmΓ(mν+1) and Q(ν) is a normalizing positive function fulfilling Q(0)=Q(1)=1 (see [4]). The related fractional integral is described as
(ABsIνσ)(ζ)=1−νQ(ν)σ(ζ)+νQ(ν)(sIνσ)(ζ), | (1.1) |
where sIν is the left Riemann-Liouville fractional integral defined by
(sIνσ)(ζ)=1Γ(ν)ζ∫s(ζ−ϑ)ν−1σ(ϑ)dϑ. | (1.2) |
Lemma 1.2. [38] For ν∈(0,1), we have
(ABsIνABCDνσ)(ζ)=σ(ζ)−σ(s). |
The outline for this paper is as follows: In Section 1, we presented some known consequences about α-admissible mappings and some useful definitions and theorems that will be used in the sequel. In Section 2, we introduce an ηℓθ-contraction type mapping and obtain some related CFP results in the context of POMSs. Also, we support our theoretical results with some examples. In Section 5, an application to find the existence of a solution for the Atangana-Baleanu coupled fractional differential equation (CFDE) in the Caputo sense is presented.
Let L be the set of all functions ℓ:[0,∞)→[0,1) satisfying the following condition:
limm→∞ℓ(τn)=1 implies limm→∞τn=1. |
We begin this part with the following definitions:
Definition 2.1. Suppose that Ξ:χ×χ→χ and η:χ2×χ2→[0,∞) are two mappings. The mapping Ξ is called η-admissible if
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1⇒η((Ξ(a,b),Ξ(b,a)),(Ξ(k,l),Ξ(l,k)))≥1, ∀a,b,k,l∈χ. |
Definition 2.2. Let (χ,ϖ) be a POMS and Ξ:χ×χ→χ be a given mapping. Ξ is termed as an ηℓθ-coupled contraction mapping if there are two functions η:χ2×χ2→[0,∞) and θ∈Θ so that
η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2), | (2.1) |
for all a,b,k,l∈χ with a≥k and b≤l, where ℓ∈L.
Remark 2.1. Notice that since ℓ:[0,∞)→[0,1), we have
η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))×θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)<θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2), for any a,b,k,l∈χ with a≠b≠k≠l. |
Theorem 2.1. Let (χ,≤,ϖ) be a complete POMS and Ξ be an ηℓθ-coupled contraction which has the mixed monotone property so that
(i) Ξ is η-admissible;
(ii) there are a0,b0∈χ so that
η((a0,b0),(Ξ(a0,b0),Ξ(b0,a0)))≥1 and η((b0,a0),(Ξ(b0,a0),Ξ(a0,b0)))≥1; |
(iii) Ξ is continuous.
If there are a0,b0∈χ so that a0≤Ξ(a0,b0) and b0≥Ξ(b0,a0), then Ξ has a CFP.
Proof. Let a0,b0∈χ be such that η((a0,b0),(Ξ(a0,b0),Ξ(b0,a0)))≥1, η((b0,a0),(Ξ(b0,a0),Ξ(a0,b0)))≥1, a0≤Ξ(a0,b0)=a1 (say) and b0≥Ξ(b0,a0)=b1 (say). Consider a2,b2∈χ so that Ξ(a1,b1)=a2 and Ξ(b1,a1)=b2. Similar to this approach, we extract two sequences {am} and {bm} in χ so that
am+1=Ξ(am,bm) and bm+1=Ξ(bm,am), for all m≥0. |
Now, we shall show that
am≤am+1 and bm≥bm+1, for all m≥0. | (2.2) |
By a mathematical induction, we have
(1) At m=0, because a0≤Ξ(a0,b0) and b0≥Ξ(b0,a0) and since Ξ(a0,b0)=a1 and Ξ(b0,a0)=b1, we obtain a0≤a1 and b0≥b1, thus (2.2) holds for m=0.
(2) Suppose that (2.2) holds for some fixed m≥0.
(3) Attempting to prove the validity of (2.2) for any m, by assumption (2) and the mixed monotone property of Ξ, we get
am+2=Ξ(am+1,bm+1)≥Ξ(am,bm+1)≥Ξ(am,bm)=am+1, |
and
bm+2=Ξ(bm+1,am+1)≤Ξ(bm,am+1)≤Ξ(bm,am)=bm+1. |
This implies that
am+2≥am+1 and bm+2≤bm+1. |
Thus, we conclude that (2.2) is valid for all n≥0.
Next, if for some m≥0, (am+1,bm+1)=(am,bm), then am=Ξ(am,bm) and bm=Ξ(bm,am), i.e., Ξ has a CFP. So, let (am+1,bm+1)≠(am,bm) for all m≥0. As Ξ is η-admissible, we get
η((a0,b0),(a1,b1))=η((a0,b0),(Ξ(a0,b0),Ξ(b0,a0)))≥1, |
implies
η((Ξ(a0,b0),Ξ(b0,a0)),(Ξ(a1,b1),Ξ(b1,a1)))=η((a1,b1),(a2,b2))≥1. |
Thus, by induction, one can write
η((am,bm),(am+1,bm+1))≥1 and η((bm,am),(bm+1,am+1))≥1 for all m≥0. | (2.3) |
Using (2.1) and (2.3) and the definition of ℓ, we have
ϖ(am,am+1)=ϖ(Ξ(am−1,bm−1),Ξ(am,bm))≤η((am−1,bm−1),(am,bm))ϖ(Ξ(am−1,bm−1),Ξ(am,bm))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(am−1,am)+ϖ(bm−1,bm)2))θ(ϖ(am−1,am)+ϖ(bm−1,bm)2)≤θ(ϖ(am−1,am)+ϖ(bm−1,bm)2). | (2.4) |
Analogously, we get
ϖ(bm,bm+1)=ϖ(Ξ(bm−1,am−1),Ξ(bm,am))≤η((bm−1,am−1),(bm,am))ϖ(Ξ(bm−1,am−1),Ξ(bm,am))≤θ(ϖ(bm−1,bm)+ϖ(am−1,am)2). | (2.5) |
Adding (2.4) and (2.5) we have
ϖ(am,am+1)+ϖ(bm,bm+1)2≤θ(ϖ(am−1,am)+ϖ(bm−1,bm)2). |
Continuing in the same way, we get
ϖ(am,am+1)+ϖ(bm,bm+1)2≤θm(ϖ(a0,a1)+ϖ(b0,b1)2), for all m∈N. |
For ϵ>0, there exists m(ϵ)∈N so that
∑m≥m(ϵ)θm(ϖ(a0,a1)+ϖ(b0,b1)2)<ϵ2, |
for some θ∈Θ. Let m,j∈N be so thatj>m>m(ϵ). Then based on the triangle inequality, we obtain
ϖ(am,aj)+ϖ(bm,bj)2≤j−1∑i=mϖ(ai,ai+1)+ϖ(bi,bi+1)2≤j−1∑i=mθi(ϖ(a0,a1)+ϖ(b0,b1)2)≤∑m≥m(ϵ)θm(ϖ(a0,a1)+ϖ(b0,b1)2)<ϵ2, |
this leads to ϖ(am,aj)+ϖ(bm,bj)<ϵ. Because
ϖ(am,aj)≤ϖ(am,aj)+ϖ(bm,bj)<ϵ, |
and
ϖ(bm,bj)≤ϖ(am,aj)+ϖ(bm,bj)<ϵ, |
hence {am} and {bm} are Cauchy sequences in χ. The completeness of χ implies that the sequences {am} and {bm} are convergent in χ, that is, there are a,b∈χ so that
limm→∞am=a and limm→∞bm=b. |
Since Ξ is continuous, am+1=Ξ(am,bm) and bm+1=Ξ(bm,am), we obtain after taking the limit as m→∞ that
a=limm→∞am=limm→∞Ξ(am−1,bm−1)=Ξ(a,b), |
and
b=limm→∞bm=limm→∞Ξ(bm−1,am−1)=Ξ(b,a). |
Therefore, Ξ has a CFP and this ends the proof.
In the above theorem, when omitting the continuity assumption on Ξ, we derive the following theorem.
Theorem 2.2. Let (χ,≤,ϖ) be a complete POMS and Ξ be an ηℓθ-coupled contraction and having the mixed monotone property so that
(a) Ξ is η-admissible;
(b) there are a0,b0∈χ so that
η((a0,b0),(Ξ(a0,b0),Ξ(b0,a0)))≥1 and η((b0,a0),(Ξ(b0,a0),Ξ(a0,b0)))≥1; |
(c) if {am} and {bm} are sequences in χ such that
η((am,bm),(am+1,bm+1))≥1, η((bm,am),(bm+1,am+1))≥1 |
for all m≥0, limm→∞am=a∈χ and limm→∞bm=b∈χ, then
η((am,bm),(a,b))≥1 and η((bm,am),(b,a))≥1. |
If a0,b0∈χ are that a0≤Ξ(a0,b0) and b0≥Ξ(b0,a0), then Ξ has a CFP.
Proof. With the same approach as for the proof of Theorem 2.1, the sequences {am} and {bm} are Cauchy sequences in χ. The completeness of χ implies that there are a,b∈χ so that
limm→∞am=a and limm→∞bm=b. |
According to the assumption (c) and (2.3), one can write
η((am,bm),(a,b))≥1 and η((bm,am),(b,a))≥1, for all m∈N. | (2.6) |
It follows by (2.3), the definition of ℓ and the property of θ(τ)<τ for all τ>0, that
ϖ(Ξ(a,b),a)≤ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(am,bm))+ϖ(Ξ(am,bm),a)≤η((am,bm),(a,b))ϖ(Ξ(am,bm),Ξ(a,b))+ϖ(am+1,a)≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(am,a)+ϖ(bm,b)2))θ(ϖ(am,a)+ϖ(bm,b)2)+ϖ(am+1,a)≤θ(ϖ(am,a)+ϖ(bm,b)2)+ϖ(am+1,a)<ϖ(am,a)+ϖ(bm,b)2+ϖ(am+1,a). | (2.7) |
Similarly, we find that
ϖ(Ξ(b,a),b)≤ϖ(Ξ(b,a),Ξ(bm,am))+ϖ(Ξ(bm,am),b)≤η((bm,am),(b,a))ϖ(Ξ(bm,am),Ξ(b,a))+ϖ(bm+1,b)≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(bm,b)+ϖ(am,a)2))θ(ϖ(bm,b)+ϖ(am,a)2)+ϖ(bm+1,b)≤θ(ϖ(bm,b)+ϖ(am,a)2)+ϖ(bm+1,b)<ϖ(bm,b)+ϖ(am,a)2+ϖ(bm+1,b). | (2.8) |
As m→∞ in (2.7) and (2.8), we have
ϖ(Ξ(a,b),a)=0 and ϖ(Ξ(b,a),b)=0. |
Hence, a=Ξ(a,b) and b=Ξ(b,a). Thus, Ξ has a CFP and this completes the proof.
In order to show the uniqueness of a CFP, we give the theorem below. If (χ,≤) is a partially ordered set, we define a partial order relation ≤ on the product χ×χ as follows:
(a,b)≤(k,l)⇔a≤k and b≥l, for all (a,b),(k,l)∈χ×χ. |
Theorem 2.3. In addition to the assertions of Theorem 2.1, assume that for each (a,b),(y,z) in χ×χ, there is (k,l)∈χ×χ so that
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1 and η((y,z),(k,l))≥1. |
Suppose also (k,l) is comparable to (a,b) and (y,z). Then Ξ has a unique CFP.
Proof. Theorem 2.1 asserts that the set of CFPs is non-empty. Let (a,b) and (y,z) be CFPs of the mapping Ξ, that is, a=Ξ(a,b), b=Ξ(b,a) and y=Ξ(y,z), z=Ξ(z,y). By hypothesis, there is (k,l)∈χ×χ so that (k,l) is comparable to (a,b) and (y,z). Let (a,b)≤(k,l), k=k0 and l=l0. Choose k1,l1∈χ×χ so that k1=Ξ(k1,l1), l1=Ξ(l1,k1). Thus, we can construct two sequences {km} and {lm} as
km+1=Ξ(km,lm) and lm+1=Ξ(lm,km). |
Since (k,l) is comparable to (a,b), in an easy way we can prove that a≤k1 and b≥l1. Hence, for m≥1, we have a≤km and b≥lm. Because for every (a,b),(y,z)∈χ×χ, there is (k,l)∈χ×χ so that
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1 and η((y,z),(k,l))≥1. | (2.9) |
Because Ξ is η-admissible, then by (2.9), we get
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1 implies η((Ξ(a,b),Ξ(b,a)),(Ξ(k,l),Ξ(l,k)))≥1. |
Since k=k0 and l=l0, we obtain
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1 implies η((Ξ(a,b),Ξ(b,a)),(Ξ(k0,l0),Ξ(l0,k0)))≥1. |
Hence,
η((a,b),(k,l))≥1 implies η((a,b),(k1,l1))≥1. |
So, by induction, we conclude that
η((a,b),(km,lm))≥1, | (2.10) |
for all m∈N. Analogously, one can obtain that η((b,a),(lm,km))≥1. Therefore, the obtained results hold if (a,b)≤(k,l). Based on (2.9) and (2.10), we can write
ϖ(a,km+1)=ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(km,lm))≤η((a,b),(km,lm))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(km,lm))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,km)+ϖ(b,lm)2))θ(ϖ(a,km)+ϖ(b,lm)2)≤θ(ϖ(a,km)+ϖ(b,lm)2). | (2.11) |
Similarly, we get
ϖ(b,lm+1)=ϖ(Ξ(b,a),Ξ(lm,km))≤η((b,a),(lm,km))ϖ(Ξ(b,a),Ξ(lm,km))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(b,lm)+ϖ(a,km)2))θ(ϖ(b,lm)+ϖ(a,km)2)≤θ(ϖ(b,lm)+ϖ(a,km)2). | (2.12) |
Adding (2.11) and (2.12), we have
ϖ(a,km+1)+ϖ(b,lm+1)2≤θ(ϖ(b,lm)+ϖ(a,km)2). |
Thus,
ϖ(a,km+1)+ϖ(b,lm+1)2≤θm(ϖ(b,l1)+ϖ(a,k1)2), | (2.13) |
for each n≥1. As m→∞ in (2.13) and by Lemma 1.1, we have
limm→∞(ϖ(a,km+1)+ϖ(b,lm+1))=0, |
which yields that
limm→∞ϖ(a,km+1)=limm→∞ϖ(b,lm+1)=0. | (2.14) |
Similarly, one obtains
limm→∞ϖ(y,km+1)=limm→∞ϖ(z,lm+1)=0. | (2.15) |
It follows from (2.14) and (2.15), we find that a=y and b=z. This proves that the CFP is unique.
Examples below support the theoretical results.
Example 2.1. (Linear case) Let ϖ:χ×χ→R be a usual metric on χ=[0,1]. Define the mappings Ξ:χ×χ→χ and η:χ2×χ2→[0,∞) by Ξ(a,b)=(a−b)32 and
η((a,b),(k,l))={32,if a≥b, k≥l,0otherwise, |
for all a,b,k,l∈χ, respectively. Consider
ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)−η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))=ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)−32ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))=(1|a−k|4+|b−l|4)(|a−k|4+|b−l|4)−32|Ξ(a,b)−Ξ(k,l)|=1−32|132(a−b)−132(k−l)|=1−364|(a−b)−(k−l)|≥0, |
which implies that
η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2). |
Therefore, (2.1) is fulfilled with ℓ(τ)=1τ and θ(τ)=τ2, for all τ>0. Also, all the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied and (0,0) is the unique CFP of Ξ.
Example 2.2. (Nonlinear case) Let ϖ:χ×χ→R be the usual metric on χ=[0,1]. Define the mappings Ξ:χ×χ→χ and η:χ2×χ2→[0,∞) by Ξ(a,b)=132(ln(1+a)−ln(1+b)) and
η((a,b),(k,l))={43,if a≥b, k≥l,0otherwise, |
for all a,b,k,l∈χ, respectively. Then, we have
ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)−η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))=ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)−43ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l))=(1θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)−43|Ξ(a,b)−Ξ(k,l)|=1−43×32|(ln(1+a)−ln(1+b))−(ln(1+k)−ln(1+l))|=1−124|(ln(1+a1+k)+ln(1+l1+b))|≥1−124(ln(1+|a−k|)+ln(1+|l−b|))≥0. |
Note that we used the property ln(1+a1+k)≤ln(1+(a−k)). Hence,
ℓ(θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2))θ(ϖ(a,k)+ϖ(b,l)2)≥η((a,b),(k,l))ϖ(Ξ(a,b),Ξ(k,l)). |
Therefore, (2.1) holds with ℓ(τ)=1τ and θ(τ)=τ2, for all τ>0. Furthermore, all the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are fulfilled and (0,0) is the unique CFP of Ξ.
In this section, we apply Theorem 2.2 to discuss the existence solution for the following Atangana–Baleanu fractional differential equation in the Caputo sense:
{(ABC0Dνσ)(ζ)=φ(ζ,σ(ζ),ρ(ζ)),ζ∈I=[0,1],(ABC0Dνρ)(ζ)=φ(ζ,ρ(ζ),σ(ζ)),0≤ν≤1,σ(0)=σ0 and ρ(0)=ρ0, | (3.1) |
where Dν is the Atangana-Baleanu derivative in the Caputo sense of order ν and φ:I×χ×χ→χ is a continuous function with φ(0,σ(0),ρ(0))=0.
Let ϖ:χ×χ→[0,∞) be a function defined by
ϖ(σ,ρ)=‖σ−ρ‖∞=supζ∈I|σ(ζ)−ρ(ζ)|, |
where χ=C(I,R) represents the set of continuous functions. Define a partial order ≤ on χ by
(a,b)≤(k,l)⇔a≤k and b≥l, for all a,b,k,l∈χ. |
It is clear that (χ,≤,ϖ) is a complete POMS.
Now, to discuss the existence solution to the problem (3.1), we describe our hypotheses in the following theorem:
Theorem 3.1. Assume that:
(h1) there is a continuous function φ:I×χ×χ→χ so that
|φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))|≤Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1ℓ(θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2))×θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2), |
for ℵ∈I, ℓ∈L, θ∈Θ and σ,ρ,σ∗,ρ∗∈χ. Moreover, there exists ℑ:C2(I)×C2(I)→C(I) such that ℑ((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))≥0 and ℑ((ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)),(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ)))≥0, for each σ,ρ,σ∗,ρ∗∈C(I) and ℵ∈I;
(h2) there exist σ1,ρ1∈C(I) with ℑ((σ1(ℵ),ρ1(ℵ)),(Ξ(σ1(ℵ),ρ1(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ1(ℵ),σ1(ℵ))))≥0 and ℑ((ρ1(ℵ),σ1(ℵ)),(Ξ(ρ1(ℵ),σ1(ℵ)),Ξ(σ1(ℵ),ρ1(ℵ))))≥0, for ℵ∈I, where Ξ:C(I)×C(I)→C(I) is defined by
Ξ(ρ,σ)(ℵ)=σ0+AB0Iνφ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)); |
(h3) for σ,ρ,σ∗,ρ∗∈C(I) and ℵ∈I, ℑ((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ), ρ∗(ℵ)))≥0 and ℑ((ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)), (ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ)))≥0 implies
ℑ((Ξ(σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ))),(Ξ(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ))))≥0 |
and
ℑ((Ξ(ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)),Ξ(σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))),(Ξ(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ)),Ξ(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))))≥0; |
(h4) if {σm},{ρm}⊆C(I), limm→∞σm=σ, limm→∞ρm=ρ in C(I), ℑ((σm,ρm),(σm+1,ρm+1)) ≥0 and ℑ((ρm,σm), (ρm+1,σm+1))≥0, then ℑ((σm,ρm) ,(σ,ρ))≥0 and ℑ((ρm,σm) ,(ρ,σ))≥0, for all m∈N.
Then there is at least one solution for the problem (3.1).
Proof. Effecting the Atangana-Baleanu integral to both sides of (3.1) and applying Lemma 1.2, we have
σ(ℵ)=σ0+AB0Iνφ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)), |
and
ρ(ℵ)=ρ0+AB0Iνφ(ℵ,ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)). |
Now, we shall prove that the mapping Ξ:C(I)×C(I)→C(I) has a CFP. From (1.1) and (1.2) and (h1), we get
|Ξ(ρ,σ)(ℵ)−Ξ(ρ∗,σ∗)(ℵ)|=|AB0Iν[φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))]|=|1−νQ(ν)[φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))]+νQ(ν) 0Iν[φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))]|≤1−νQ(ν)|φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))|+νQ(ν) 0Iν|φ(ℵ,σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))−φ(ℵ,σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))|≤1−νQ(ν)×Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1ℓ(θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2))×θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2)+νQ(ν)×Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1 0Iν(1)ℓ(θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2))×θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2)={Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1ℓ(θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2))×θ(|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2)}(1−νQ(ν)+νQ(ν)νΓ(ν))≤{Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1ℓ(θ(supℵ∈I|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+supℵ∈I|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2))×θ(supℵ∈I|σ(ℵ)−σ∗(ℵ)|+supℵ∈I|ρ(ℵ)−ρ∗(ℵ)|2)}(1−νQ(ν)+νQ(ν)νΓ(ν))=(Q(ν)Γ(ν)(1−ν)Γ(ν)+1ℓ(θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2))θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2))×(1−νQ(ν)+1Q(ν)Γ(ν))=ℓ(θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2))θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2). |
Hence, for σ,ρ∈C(I), ℵ∈I, with ℑ((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))≥0 and ℑ((ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)),(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ)))≥0, we get
ϖ(Ξ(ρ,σ)(ℵ),Ξ(ρ∗,σ∗))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2))θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2). |
Define η:C2(I)×C2(I)→[0,∞) by
η((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))={1,if ℑ((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))≥0,0,otherwise. |
So
η((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))ϖ(Ξ(ρ,σ)(ℵ),Ξ(ρ∗,σ∗))≤ℓ(θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2))θ(ϖ(σ,σ∗)+ϖ(ρ,ρ∗)2). |
Then, Ξ is an ηℓθ-coupled contraction mapping. Now, for each ρ,σ,ρ∗,σ∗∈C(I) and ℵ∈I, we have
η((σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)))≥1, |
due to definition of ℑ and η. So, hypothesis (h3) gives
{η((Ξ(σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ))),(Ξ(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ))))≥1,η((Ξ(ρ(ℵ),σ(ℵ)),Ξ(σ(ℵ),ρ(ℵ))),(Ξ(ρ∗(ℵ),σ∗(ℵ)),Ξ(σ∗(ℵ),ρ∗(ℵ))))≥1, |
for ρ,σ,ρ∗,σ∗∈C(I). Therefore, Ξ is η-admissible. From (h2), there are σ0,ρ0∈C(I) with η((σ0(ℵ),ρ0(ℵ)),Ξ(σ0(ℵ),ρ0(ℵ)))≥1 and η((ρ0(ℵ),σ0(ℵ)),Ξ(ρ0(ℵ),σ0(ℵ)))≥1. Using (h4) and Theorem 2.2, we conclude that there is (ˆσ,ˆρ)∈C(I) with ˆσ=Ξ(ˆσ,ˆρ) and ˆρ=Ξ(ˆρ,ˆσ), that is, Ξ has a CFP, which is a solution of the system (3.1).
Many physical phenomena can be described by nonlinear differential equations (both ODEs and PDEs), so the study of numerical and analytical methods used in solving nonlinear differential equations are an interesting topic for analyzing scientific engineering problems. From this perspective, some coupled fixed point results for the class of ηℓθ-contractions in POMSs are obtained. These results are reinforced by their applications in a study of the existence of a solution for a CFDE with the Mittag-Leffler kernel. In the future, our findings may be applied to differential equations of an arbitrary fractional order, linear and nonlinear fractional integro-differential systems, Hadamard fractional derivatives, Caputo-Fabrizio's kernel, and so on.
This work was supported in part by the Basque Government under Grant IT1555-22.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] |
Wong ND, Kouwabunpat D, Vo AN, et al. (1994) Coronary calcium and atherosclerosis by ultrafast computed tomography in asymptomatic men and women: relation to age and risk factors. Am Heart J 127: 422-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-8703(94)90133-3 ![]() |
[2] |
Kedhi E, Généreux P, Palmerini T, et al. (2014) Impact of coronary lesion complexity on drug-eluting stent outcomes in patients with and without diabetes mellitus: analysis from 18 pooled randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 63: 2111-2118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.064 ![]() |
[3] |
Wang XR, Zhang JJ, Xu XX, et al. (2019) Prevalence of coronary artery calcification and its association with mortality, cardiovascular events in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ren Fail 41: 244-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/0886022X.2019.1595646 ![]() |
[4] | Roy SK, Cespedes A, Li D, et al. (2011) Mild and moderate pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease is associated with increased coronary artery calcium. Vasc Health Risk Manag 7: 719-724. https://doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S24536 |
[5] |
Généreux P, Madhavan MV, Mintz GS, et al. (2014) Ischemic outcomes after coronary intervention of calcified vessels in acute coronary syndromes. Pooled analysis from the HORIZONS-AMI (Harmonizing Outcomes With Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction) and ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 63: 1845-1854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.034 ![]() |
[6] |
Madhavan MV, Tarigopula M, Mintz GS, et al. (2014) Coronary artery calcification: pathogenesis and prognostic implications. J Am Coll Cardiol 63: 1703-1714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.017 ![]() |
[7] | Hu YC, Chen WJ, Lai CH, et al. (2023) Rotablation for octogenarians in a modern Cathlab: short- and intermediate-term results. Acta Cardiol Sin 39: 424-434. https://doi.org/10.6515/ACS.202305_39(3).20220926B |
[8] |
Valgimigli M, Bueno H, Byrne RA, et al. (2018) 2017 ESC focused update on dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease developed in collaboration with EACTS: the task force for dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 39: 213-260. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx419 ![]() |
[9] |
Riley RF, Henry TD, Mahmud E, et al. (2020) SCAI position statement on optimal percutaneous coronary interventional therapy for complex coronary artery disease. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 96: 346-362. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.28994 ![]() |
[10] |
Zeitouni M, Silvain J, Guedeney P, et al. (2018) Periprocedural myocardial infarction and injury in elective coronary stenting. Eur Heart J 39: 1100-1109. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx799 ![]() |
[11] |
Ndrepepa G, Colleran R, Braun S, et al. (2016) High-sensitivity troponin T and mortality after elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 68: 2259-2268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.059 ![]() |
[12] |
Prasad A, Singh M, Lerman A, et al. (2006) Isolated elevation in troponin T after percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with higher long-term mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol 48: 1765-1770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.04.102 ![]() |
[13] |
Xu Q, Sun Y, Zhang Y, et al. (2017) Effect of a 180 mg ticagrelor loading dose on myocardial necrosis in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention: a preliminary study. Cardiol J 24: 15-24. https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2017.0002 ![]() |
[14] |
Bonello L, Laine M, Thuny F, et al. (2016) Platelet reactivity in patients receiving a maintenance dose of P2Y12-ADP receptor antagonists undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. Int J Cardiol 216: 190-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.04.165 ![]() |
[15] |
Orme RC, Parker WAE, Thomas MR, et al. (2018) Study of two dose regimens of ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary artery disease. Circulation 138: 1290-1300. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034790 ![]() |
[16] |
Khan MR, Koshy AN, Tanner R, et al. (2024) Real-world comparison of clopidogrel with ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with chronic coronary disease who underwent atherectomy. Am J Cardiol 217: 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.02.006 ![]() |
[17] |
Dehmer GJ, Nichols TC, Bode AP, et al. (1997) Assessment of platelet activation by coronary sinus blood sampling during balloon angioplasty and directional coronary atherectomy. Am J Cardiol 80: 871-877. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(97)00538-9 ![]() |
[18] |
Bau J, Gutensohn K, Kuck KH, et al. (2000) Flow-cytometric analysis of platelet activation during rotablation. Z Kardiol 89: 15-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003920050003 (Article in German) ![]() |
[19] |
Kini A, Kini S, Marmur JD, et al. (1999) Incidence and mechanism of creatine kinase-MB enzyme elevation after coronary intervention with different devices. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 48: 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1522-726x(199910)48:2<123::aid-ccd1>3.0.co;2-o ![]() |
[20] |
Sharma SK, Dangas G, Mehran R, et al. (1997) Risk factors for the development of slow flow during rotational coronary atherectomy. Am J Cardiol 80: 219-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(97)00325-1 ![]() |
[21] |
Kini A, Marmur JD, Duvvuri S, et al. (1999) Rotational atherectomy: improved procedural outcome with evolution of technique and equipment. Single-center results of first 1000 patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 46: 305-311. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-726X(199903)46:3<305::AID-CCD9>3.0.CO;2-U ![]() |
[22] |
Chieffo A, Latib A, Caussin C, et al. (2013) A prospective, randomized trial of intravascular-ultrasound guided compared to angiography guided stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: the AVIO trial. Am Heart J 165: 65-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2012.09.017 ![]() |
[23] |
Kirtane AJ, Doshi D, Leon MB, et al. (2016) Treatment of higher-risk patients with an indication for revascularization: evolution within the field of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 134: 422-431. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.022061 ![]() |
[24] |
Giustino G, Chieffo A, Palmerini T, et al. (2016) Efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy after complex PCI. J Am Coll Cardiol 68: 1851-1864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.07.760 ![]() |
[25] |
Yeh RW, Kereiakes DJ, Steg PG, et al. (2017) Lesion complexity and outcomes of extended dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 70: 2213-2223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.09.011 ![]() |
[26] |
Généreux P, Giustino G, Redfors B, et al. (2018) Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation. Int J Cardiol 268: 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.03.103 ![]() |
[27] |
Chandrasekhar J, Baber U, Sartori S, et al. (2018) Associations between complex PCI and prasugrel or clopidogrel use in patients with acute coronary syndrome who undergo PCI: from the PROMETHEUS study. Can J Cardiol 34: 319-329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2017.12.023 ![]() |
[28] |
Lipiecki J, Brunel P, Morice MC, et al. (2018) Biolimus A9 polymer-free coated stents in high bleeding risk patients undergoing complex PCI: evidence from the LEADERS FREE randomised clinical trial. EuroIntervention 14: e418-e425. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00293 ![]() |
[29] |
Costa F, Van Klaveren D, Feres F, et al. (2019) Dual antiplatelet therapy duration based on ischemic and bleeding risks after coronary stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 73: 741-754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.048 ![]() |
[30] |
Choi KH, Song YB, Lee JM, et al. (2019) Impact of intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing complex procedures. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 12: 607-620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.01.227 ![]() |
[31] |
Henson KD, Popma JJ, Leon MB, et al. (1993) Comparison of results of rotational coronary atherectomy in three age groups (< 70, 70 to 79 and > or = 80 years). Am J Cardiol 71: 862-864. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9149(93)90839-5 ![]() |
[32] | Gravina Taddei CF, Weintraub WS, King 3rd S, et al. (1999) Early and intermediate outcomes after rotational atherectomy in octogenarian patients. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 8: 169-172. |
[33] |
Sandhu K, Nadar SK (2015) Percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly. Int J Cardiol 199: 342-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.188 ![]() |
[34] | Shanmugam VB, Harper R, Meredith I, et al. (2015) An overview of PCI in the very elderly. J Geriatr Cardiol 12: 174-184. https://doi.org/10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2015.02.012 |
[35] |
Urban P, Gregson J, Owen R, et al. (2021) Assessing the risks of bleeding vs thrombotic events in patients at high bleeding risk after coronary stent implantation: the ARC–high bleeding risk trade-off model. JAMA Cardiol 6: 410-419. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2020.6814 ![]() |
[36] |
Mohamed MO, Polad J, Hildick-Smith D, et al. (2020) Impact of coronary lesion complexity in percutaneous coronary intervention: one-year outcomes from the large, multicentre e-Ultimaster registry. EuroIntervention 16: 603-612. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-20-00361 ![]() |
[37] |
Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A, et al. (2020) 2019 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 41: 407-477. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425 ![]() |
[38] |
Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, et al. (2023) 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 44: 3720-3826. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad191 ![]() |
[39] |
Lis P, Rajzer M, Klima Ł (2024) The Significance of coronary artery calcification for percutaneous coronary interventions. Healthcare 12: 520. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12050520 ![]() |
[40] |
Baber U, Mehran R, Giustino G, et al. (2016) Coronary thrombosis and major bleeding after PCI with drug-eluting stents: risk scores from Paris. J Am Coll Cardiol 67: 2224-2234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.064 ![]() |
[41] |
Raposeiras-Roubín S, Faxén J, Íñiguez-Romo A, et al. (2018) Development and external validation of a post-discharge bleeding risk score in patients with acute coronary syndrome: the BleeMACS score. Int J Cardiol 254: 10-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.10.103 ![]() |
[42] |
Urban P, Mehran R, Colleran R, et al. (2019) Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk. Eur Heart J 40: 2632-2653. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz372 ![]() |
[43] |
Caiazzo G, Di Mario C, Kedhi E, et al. (2023) Current management of highly calcified coronary lesions: an overview of the current status. J Clin Med 12: 4844. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12144844 ![]() |
[44] |
Koo BK, Kang J, Park KW, et al. (2021) Aspirin versus clopidogrel for chronic maintenance monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (HOST-EXAM): an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre trial. Lancet 397: 2487-2496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01063-1 ![]() |
[45] |
Capodanno D, Angiolillo DJ (2023) Long-term P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin as single antiplatelet therapy in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 147: 118-121. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.063004 ![]() |
[46] |
Andò G, De Santis GA, Greco A, et al. (2022) P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin following dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: a network meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 15: 2239-2249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2022.08.009 ![]() |
[47] |
Andò G, Lombardo L, Alagna G, et al. (2024) Monotherapy with P2Y12-inhibitors after dual antiplatelet therapy: filling gaps in evidence. Int J Cardiol 401: 131893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.131893 ![]() |
[48] | Alagna G, Mazzone P, Contarini M, et al. (2023) Dual antiplatelet therapy with parenteral P2Y12 inhibitors: rationale, evidence, and future directions. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis 10: 163. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd10040163 |
[49] |
Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Weisz G, et al. (2013) Platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after coronary artery implantation of drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES): a prospective multicentre registry study. Lancet 382: 614-623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61170-8 ![]() |
[50] |
Guedeney P, Claessen BE, Mehran R, et al. (2020) Coronary calcification and long-term outcomes according to drug-eluting stent generation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 13: 1417-1428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2020.03.053 ![]() |
[51] |
Sangiorgi G, Rumberger JA, Severson A, et al. (1998) Arterial calcification and not lumen stenosis is highly correlated with atherosclerotic plaque burden in humans: a histologic study of 723 coronary artery segments using nondecalcifying methodology. J Am Coll Cardiol 31: 126-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00443-9 ![]() |
[52] |
Criqui MH, Denenberg JO, Ix JH, et al. (2014) Calcium density of coronary artery plaque and risk of incident cardiovascular events. JAMA 311: 271-278. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.282535 ![]() |
[53] |
Généreux P, Madhavan MV, Mintz GS, et al. (2014) Relation between coronary calcium and major bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes (from the acute catheterization and urgent intervention triage strategy and harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction trials). Am J Cardiol 113: 930-935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.11.053 ![]() |
[54] |
Généreux P, Redfors B, Witzenbichler B, et al. (2017) Two-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions with drug-eluting stents. Int J Cardiol 231: 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.12.150 ![]() |
[55] |
Giustino G, Mastoris I, Baber U, et al. (2016) Correlates and impact of coronary artery calcifications in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: from the Women in Innovation and Drug-Eluting Stents (WIN-DES) collaboration. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 9: 1890-1901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.06.022 ![]() |
[56] |
Lee MS, Yang T, Lasala J, et al. (2016) Impact of coronary artery calcification in percutaneous coronary intervention with paclitaxel-eluting stents: two-year clinical outcomes of paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients from the ARRIVE program. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 88: 891-897. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.26395 ![]() |
[57] |
Huisman J, van der Heijden LC, Kok MM, et al. (2016) Impact of severe lesion calcification on clinical outcome of patients with stable angina, treated with newer generation permanent polymer-coated drug-eluting stents: a patient-level pooled analysis from TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II). Am Heart J 175: 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2016.02.012 ![]() |
[58] |
Bourantas CV, Zhang YJ, Garg S, et al. (2014) Prognostic implications of coronary calcification in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease treated by percutaneous coronary intervention: a patient-level pooled analysis of 7 contemporary stent trials. Heart 100: 1158-1164. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2013-305180 ![]() |
[59] |
Silvain J, Lattuca B, Beygui F, et al. (2020) Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial. Lancet 396: 1737-1744. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32236-4 ![]() |
[60] |
Yeh RW, Secemsky EA, Kereiakes DJ, et al. (2016) Development and validation of a prediction rule for benefit and harm of dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA 315: 1735-1749. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.3775 ![]() |
[61] |
Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. (2009) Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 361: 1045-1057. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0904327 ![]() |
[62] |
Mehilli J, Baquet M, Hochholzer W, et al. (2020) Randomized comparison of intensified and standard P2Y12-receptor-inhibition before elective percutaneous coronary intervention: the SASSICAIA trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 13: e008649. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008649 ![]() |
[63] |
Harrington RA, Stone GW, McNulty S, et al. (2009) Platelet inhibition with cangrelor in patients undergoing PCI. N Engl J Med 361: 2318-2329. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0908628 ![]() |
[64] |
Lattuca B, Mazeau C, Cayla G, et al. (2024) Ticagrelor vs clopidogrel for complex percutaneous coronary intervention in chronic coronary syndrome. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 17: 359-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2023.12.011 ![]() |
[65] |
Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, et al. (2011) Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation 123: 2736-2747. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.009449 ![]() |
[66] |
Dangas G, Baber U, Sharma S, et al. (2020) Ticagrelor with or without aspirin after complex PCI. J Am Coll Cardiol 75: 2414-2424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.03.011 ![]() |
[67] |
Lhermusier T, Motreff P, Bataille V, et al. (2023) Ticagrelor in rotational atherectomy to reduce TROPonin enhancement: the TIRATROP study, a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Med 12: 1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041445 ![]() |
[68] |
Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. (2014) 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with Non-ST-Elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 64: e139-e228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.09.017 ![]() |
[69] |
Ellis SG, Popma JJ, Buchbinder M, et al. (1994) Relation of clinical presentation, stenosis morphology, and operator technique to the procedural results of rotational atherectomy and rotational atherectomy-facilitated angioplasty. Circulation 89: 882-892. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.89.2.882 ![]() |
[70] |
Reisman M, Shuman BJ, Harms V (1998) Analysis of heat generation during rotational atherectomy using different operational techniques. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 44: 453-455. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0304(199808)44:4<453::aid-ccd21>3.0.co;2-i ![]() |
[71] |
Nienhuis MB, Ottervanger JP, Bilo HJG, et al. (2008) Prognostic value of troponin after elective percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 71: 318-324. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.21345 ![]() |
[72] |
Tricoci P, Leonardi S, White J, et al. (2013) Cardiac troponin after percutaneous coronary intervention and 1-year mortality in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome using systematic evaluation of biomarker trends. J Am Coll Cardiol 62: 242-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.04.043 ![]() |
[73] |
Safarian H, Alidoosti M, Shafiee A, et al. (2014) The SYNTAX score can predict major adverse cardiac events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart Views 15: 99-105. https://doi.org/10.4103/1995-705X.151081 ![]() |
[74] |
Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. (2022) 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on clinical practice guidelines. Circulation 145: e4-e17. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001039 ![]() |
[75] |
Leonardi S, Gragnano F, Carrara G, et al. (2021) Prognostic implications of declining hemoglobin content in patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 77: 375-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.046 ![]() |
[76] |
Valgimigli M, Smits PC, Frigoli E, et al. (2022) Duration of antiplatelet therapy after complex percutaneous coronary intervention in patients at high bleeding risk: a MASTER DAPT trial sub-analysis. Eur Heart J 43: 3100-3114. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac284 ![]() |
[77] |
Gragnano F, Mehran R, Branca M, et al. (2023) P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy or dual antiplatelet therapy after complex percutaneous coronary interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol 81: 537-552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.11.041 ![]() |
[78] |
Valgimigli M, Gragnano F, Branca M, et al. (2021) P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy or dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary revascularisation: individual patient level meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 373: n1332. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n1332 ![]() |
[79] |
Collet JP, Thiele H, Barbato E, et al. (2021) 2020 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 42: 1289-1367. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa575 ![]() |
[80] |
Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Heg D, et al. (2021) Dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI in patients at high bleeding risk. N Engl J Med 385: 1643-1655. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2108749 ![]() |
[81] |
Serruys PW, Takahashi K, Chichareon P, et al. (2019) Impact of long-term ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients who underwent complex percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Global Leaders trial. Eur Heart J 40: 2595-2604. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz453 ![]() |
[82] |
Yamamoto K, Watanabe H, Morimoto T, et al. (2021) Very Short dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in patients who underwent complex percutaneous coronary intervention: insight from the STOPDAPT-2 trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 14: e010384. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.010384 ![]() |
[83] |
Lee SJ, Lee YJ, Kim BK, et al. (2021) Ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor with aspirin in acute coronary syndrome patients with a high risk of ischemic events. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 14: e010812. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.010812 ![]() |
[84] |
Roh JW, Hahn JY, Oh JH, et al. (2021) P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in complex percutaneous coronary intervention: a post-hoc analysis of SMART-CHOICE randomized clinical trial. Cardiol J 28: 855-863. https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0101 ![]() |
[85] |
Franzone A, McFadden E, Leonardi S, et al. (2019) Ticagrelor alone versus dual antiplatelet therapy from 1 month after drug-eluting coronary stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 74: 2223-2234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2019.08.1038 ![]() |
[86] |
Vranckx P, Valgimigli M, Jüni P, et al. (2018) Ticagrelor plus aspirin for 1 month, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months vs aspirin plus clopidogrel or ticagrelor for 12 months, followed by aspirin monotherapy for 12 months after implantation of a drug-eluting stent: a multicentre, open-label, randomised superiority trial. Lancet 392: 940-949. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31858-0 ![]() |
[87] |
Watanabe H, Domei T, Morimoto T, et al. (2019) Effect of 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy followed by clopidogrel vs 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy on cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients receiving PCI: the STOPDAPT-2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 321: 2414-2427. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.8145 ![]() |
[88] |
Hahn JY, Song YB, Oh JH, et al. (2019) Effect of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs dual antiplatelet therapy on cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SMART-CHOICE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 321: 2428-2437. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.8146 ![]() |
[89] |
Mehran R, Baber U, Sharma SK, et al. (2019) Ticagrelor with or without aspirin in high-risk patients after PCI. N Engl J Med 381: 2032-2042. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1908419 ![]() |
[90] |
Kim BK, Hong SJ, Cho YH, et al. (2020) Effect of ticagrelor monotherapy vs ticagrelor with aspirin on major bleeding and cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome: the TICO randomized clinical trial. JAMA 323: 2407-2416. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.7580 ![]() |
[91] |
Natsuaki M, Watanabe H, Morimoto T, et al. (2024) An aspirin-free versus dual antiplatelet strategy for coronary stenting: STOPDAPT-3 randomized trial. Circulation 149: 585-600. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.066720 ![]() |
[92] |
Nakamura M, Kimura K, Kimura T, et al. (2020) JCS 2020 guideline focused update on antithrombotic therapy in patients with coronary artery disease. Circ J 84: 831-865. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-19-1109 ![]() |
[93] |
Ueki Y, Karagiannis A, Zanchin C, et al. (2019) Validation of high-risk features for stent-related ischemic events as endorsed by the 2017 DAPT guidelines. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 12: 820-830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2018.12.005 ![]() |
[94] | Yamamoto K, Shiomi H, Morimoto T, et al. (2021) Ischemic and bleeding risk after complex percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with or without high bleeding risk. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 97: E758-E770. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29335 |
[95] |
Yamamoto K, Natsuaki M, Watanabe H, et al. (2024) An aspirin-free strategy for immediate treatment following complex percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 17: 1119-1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2024.03.017 ![]() |
[96] |
Valgimigli M, Gragnano F, Branca M, et al. (2024) Ticagrelor or clopidogrel monotherapy vs dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and patient-level meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol 9: 437-448. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2024.0133 ![]() |
[97] |
Watanabe H, Morimoto T, Natsuaki M, et al. (2022) Comparison of clopidogrel monotherapy after 1 to 2 months of dual antiplatelet therapy with 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome: the STOPDAPT-2 ACS randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol 7: 407-417. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamacardio.2021.5244 ![]() |
[98] |
Capodanno D, Baber U, Bhatt DL, et al. (2022) P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Nat Rev Cardiol 19: 829-844. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-022-00725-6 ![]() |
[99] |
Capodanno D, Mehran R, Krucoff MW, et al. (2023) Defining strategies of modulation of antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: a consensus document from the academic research consortium. Circulation 147: 1933-1944. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.064473 ![]() |
[100] |
Vrints C, Andreotti F, Koskinas KC, et al. (2024) 2024 ESC guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 45: 3415-3537. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177 ![]() |
[101] |
Cuisset T, Deharo P, Quilici J, et al. (2017) Benefit of switching dual antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndrome: the TOPIC (timing of platelet inhibition after acute coronary syndrome) randomized study. Eur Heart J 38: 3070-3078. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx175 ![]() |
[102] |
Notarangelo FM, Maglietta G, Bevilacqua P, et al. (2018) Pharmacogenomic approach to selecting antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: the PHARMCLO trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 71: 1869-1877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.029 ![]() |
[103] |
Kim CJ, Park MW, Kim MC, et al. (2021) Unguided de-escalation from ticagrelor to clopidogrel in stabilised patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (TALOS-AMI): an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet 398: 1305-1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01445-8 ![]() |
[104] |
Sibbing D, Aradi D, Jacobshagen C, et al. (2017) A randomised trial on platelet function-guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in ACS patients undergoing PCI. Rationale and design of the Testing Responsiveness to Platelet Inhibition on Chronic Antiplatelet Treatment for Acute Coronary Syndromes (TROPICAL-ACS) trial. Thromb Haemost 117: 188-195. https://doi.org/10.1160/TH16-07-0557 ![]() |
[105] |
Claassens DMF, Vos GJA, Bergmeijer TO, et al. (2019) A genotype-guided strategy for oral P2Y12 inhibitors in primary PCI. N Engl J Med 381: 1621-1631. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1907096 ![]() |
[106] |
Lee JM, Cho DK, Hahn JY, et al. (2016) Safety of 6-month duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes: rationale and design of the Smart Angioplasty Research Team-safety of 6-month duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (SMART-DATE) prospective multicenter randomized trial. Am Heart J 182: 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2016.07.022 ![]() |
[107] |
Camaro C, Damen SAJ, Brouwer MA, et al. (2016) Randomized evaluation of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with the COMBO dual therapy stent: rationale and design of the REDUCE trial. Am Heart J 178: 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2016.04.016 ![]() |
[108] |
Kedhi E, Fabris E, van der Ent M, et al. (2018) Six months versus 12 months dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (DAPT-STEMI): randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. BMJ 363: k3793. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3793 ![]() |
[109] |
Hong SJ, Lee SJ, Suh Y, et al. (2024) Stopping aspirin within 1 month after stenting for ticagrelor monotherapy in acute coronary syndrome: the T-PASS randomized noninferiority trial. Circulation 149: 562-573. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.066943 ![]() |
[110] |
Ge Z, Kan J, Gao X, et al. (2024) Ticagrelor alone versus ticagrelor plus aspirin from month 1 to month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ULTIMATE-DAPT): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial. Lancet 403: 1866-1878. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00473-2 ![]() |
[111] |
Gragnano F, Cao D, Pirondini L, et al. (2023) P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin monotherapy for secondary prevention of coronary events. J Am Coll Cardiol 82: 89-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2023.04.051 ![]() |
[112] |
Chiarito M, Sanz-Sánchez J, Cannata F, et al. (2020) Monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with established atherosclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 395: 1487-1495. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30315-9 ![]() |
[113] |
Bhatt DL (2023) Optimal antiplatelet therapy revisited: When is a single better than a double?. J Am Coll Cardiol 81: 553-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.11.040 ![]() |