[The best of thrombosis in 2004]

The optimal pharmacological antithrombotic treatment for interventional coronary procedures is a controversial subject. The ISAR-REACT trial investigated the necessity of a IIb/IIIa glycoprotein inhibitor in procedures not considered at high risk, that is to say excluding acute coronary syndromes, and concluded that there was no additional gain with this treatment compared with placebo when the patient was pre-treated with 600 mg of clopidogrel. The REPLACE-2 trial proposed an alternative to a treatment with NFH and IIb/IIIa glycoprotein inhibitor with the use of a direct antithrombin, bivalirudine. Heparin therapy of acute coronary syndromes and the eventual ensuing interventional coronary procedure may employ NFH or LMWH. New large scale trials (SYNERGY and phase A of the so-called A to Z trial) compared the two approaches and are reported later on. If facilitated angioplasty is a seductive concept, the best antithrombotic association remains to be determined (BRAVE trial). Bitherapy with a platelet inhibitor and an antithrombotic, ximegalatran, was tested in the ESTEEM trial and in the post-infarct period. Bitherapy with platelet inhibitors clopidogrel and aspirin versus clopidogrel alone was tested in patients with "ischaemic" stroke but does not seem to be more effective than monotherapy. In pulmonary embolism, the fondaparinux seems to be an alternative to NFH. Finally, the concept of resistance to platelet inhibitors is in vogue and is the subject of some interesting trials.