TY - JOUR
T1 - Perioperative platelet reactivity over time in patients undergoing vascular surgery
T2 - An observational pilot study
AU - Brand Kanters, A.R.T.
AU - Roozendaal, N. C.
AU - Parr, N.M.J.
AU - Pasterkamp, G.
AU - Urbanus, R. T.
AU - Korporaal, S. J.A.
AU - de Borst, Gert J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 Brand Kanters et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2024/6
Y1 - 2024/6
N2 - Background Despite Antiplatelet therapy (APT), cardiovascular patients undergoing revascularisation remain at high risk for thrombotic events. Individual response to APT varies substantially, resulting in insufficient protection from thrombotic events due to high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) in ≤40% of patients. Individual variation in platelet response impairs APT guidance on a single patient level. Unfortunately, little is known about individual platelet response to APT over time, timing for accurate residual platelet reactivity measurement, or the optimal test to monitor residual platelet reactivity. Aims To investigate residual platelet reactivity variability over time in individual patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) treated with clopidogrel. Methods Platelet reactivity was determined in patients undergoing CEA in a prospective, single-centre, observational study using the VerifyNow (change in turbidity from ADP-induced binding to fibrinogen-coated beads), the VASP assay (quantification of phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein), and a flow-cytometry-based assay (PACT) at four perioperative time points. Genotyping identified slow (CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*3) and fast (CYP2C19*17) metabolisers. Results Between December 2017 and November 2019, 50 patients undergoing CEA were included. Platelet reactivity measured with the VerifyNow (p = < .001) and VASP (p = .029) changed over time, while the PACT did not. The VerifyNow identified patients changing HTRP status after surgery. The VASP identified patients changing HTPR status after eight weeks (p = .018). CYP2C19 genotyping identified 13 slow metabolisers. Conclusion In patients undergoing CEA, perioperative platelet reactivity measurements fluctuate over time with little agreement between platelet reactivity assays. Consequently, HTPR status of individual patients measured with the VerifyNow and VASP assay changed over time. Therefore, generally used perioperative platelet reactivity measurements seem unreliable for adjusting perioperative APT strategy.
AB - Background Despite Antiplatelet therapy (APT), cardiovascular patients undergoing revascularisation remain at high risk for thrombotic events. Individual response to APT varies substantially, resulting in insufficient protection from thrombotic events due to high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) in ≤40% of patients. Individual variation in platelet response impairs APT guidance on a single patient level. Unfortunately, little is known about individual platelet response to APT over time, timing for accurate residual platelet reactivity measurement, or the optimal test to monitor residual platelet reactivity. Aims To investigate residual platelet reactivity variability over time in individual patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) treated with clopidogrel. Methods Platelet reactivity was determined in patients undergoing CEA in a prospective, single-centre, observational study using the VerifyNow (change in turbidity from ADP-induced binding to fibrinogen-coated beads), the VASP assay (quantification of phosphorylation of vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein), and a flow-cytometry-based assay (PACT) at four perioperative time points. Genotyping identified slow (CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*3) and fast (CYP2C19*17) metabolisers. Results Between December 2017 and November 2019, 50 patients undergoing CEA were included. Platelet reactivity measured with the VerifyNow (p = < .001) and VASP (p = .029) changed over time, while the PACT did not. The VerifyNow identified patients changing HTRP status after surgery. The VASP identified patients changing HTPR status after eight weeks (p = .018). CYP2C19 genotyping identified 13 slow metabolisers. Conclusion In patients undergoing CEA, perioperative platelet reactivity measurements fluctuate over time with little agreement between platelet reactivity assays. Consequently, HTPR status of individual patients measured with the VerifyNow and VASP assay changed over time. Therefore, generally used perioperative platelet reactivity measurements seem unreliable for adjusting perioperative APT strategy.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85196966497&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0304800
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0304800
M3 - Article
C2 - 38924073
AN - SCOPUS:85196966497
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 19
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 6
M1 - e0304800
ER -