Modern Era in Personalized Medicine of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Myocardial Revascularization

Résumé fourni par la source

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor remains the cornerstone of antithrombotic management after myocardial revascularization. However, the traditional “one-size-fits-all” approach to DAPT duration and intensity fails to account for marked interindividual variability in drug response—driven by genetic polymorphisms, notably CYP2C19 variants like CYP2C19*2, which reach a frequency of up to 75% in specific groups like the Melanesian population—comorbidities such as diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and dynamic clinical factors including age and concomitant medications. We examine the current landscape of precision medicine tools for individualizing DAPT, including platelet function testing, point-of-care genotyping, validated clinical risk scores, and emerging artificial intelligence (AI)–based predictive models. Evidence from landmark trials is synthesized to evaluate escalation, de-escalation, and duration-tailoring strategies within the ischemic–bleeding trade-off framework. Special populations requiring individualized approaches are reviewed, including patients with atrial fibrillation, the elderly, and those requiring urgent noncardiac surgery with perioperative bridging. Future directions, including multi-omics integration, novel antiplatelet agents, and AI-driven clinical decision support systems, are also explored. As a narrative review, conclusions should be interpreted as reflective of current evidence synthesis rather than systematic-review-grade evidence, given the absence of formal risk-of-bias scoring or meta-analytic pooling. Personalized DAPT guided by complementary genetic and phenotypic testing, integrated with dynamic risk stratification, offers a paradigm shift from empiric therapy toward precision-guided antithrombotic management with the potential to simultaneously reduce ischemic and bleeding complications.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.