Oral antiplatelet therapy and platelet inhibition: An experience from a tertiary care center

Association of same-day antiplatelet loading and outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization

OBJECTIVE

Prior studies have emphasized the importance of compliance with preoperative dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). This investigation examines differences in perioperative outcomes after TCAR in those receiving a loading dose of antiplatelet medications on the day of the procedure vs those already maintained on DAPT.

METHODS

Consecutive TCAR procedures from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2016-2022) were identified. Patients were divided into (1) those on preoperative DAPT (aspirin and P2YI2 antagonist) taken at least within 36 hours of the procedure (61.9%); (2) those on at least one antiplatelet medication who received a supplemental dose of another antiplatelet within 4 hours before the procedure (AP + loading, 37.1%); and (3) patients receiving only a loading dose (of aspirin or P2Y12 antagonist) without prior use of antiplatelet therapy (1%). In-hospital and 30-day outcomes were compared between the three groups using univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 22,310 patients were on DAPT; 13,392 were on at least one antiplatelet and received a supplemental dose (AP + loading) and 361 patients received a loading dose on the day of the intervention. On univariable analysis, there was no significant difference in in-hospital or 30-day outcomes between the three groups, except for an increased rate of in-hospital stent thrombosis/occlusion in patients loaded with antiplatelet medications on the day of TCAR (n = 2 [0.6%]), compared with those maintained on DAPT (n = 23 [0.1%]) and patients in the AP + loading group (n = 26 [0.2%]) (P = .01). After adjusting for baseline differences between the three groups, no significant association was observed between the groups and in-hospital stroke/death or bleeding complications. However, compared with patients maintained on DAPT, patients receiving antiplatelet loading had higher odds of stent thrombosis/occlusion (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-3.4; P = .03). Among patients in the AP + loading group, those maintained on aspirin preoperatively and receiving another antiplatelet loading on the day of the intervention were more likely to have stent thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that administering loading or supplemental doses of antiplatelet medication(s) to rapidly achieve therapeutic levels on the day of TCAR is not associated with higher rates of in-hospital stroke or bleeding complications. However, an increase in stent thrombosis or occlusion was noted in patients receiving a loading dose or supplementation of antiplatelet medications and warrants further investigation. In elective cases, it might be safer to delay intervention until patients receive adequate DAPT regimen, especially if patients are not maintained on P2Y12 inhibitors preoperatively.

Removal of an Epidural Catheter in a Patient Receiving Ticagrelor: A Case Report

We report a case of a patient who had a coronary angioplasty and received heparin, clopidogrel, and ticagrelor on the evening of bilateral total knee arthroplasties performed under combined spinal epidural anesthesia. After a multidisciplinary meeting, the epidural catheter was removed 5 days after the dose of clopidogrel. With the catheter still in place, ticagrelor was continued to prevent stent thrombosis. Removing an epidural catheter in a patient on antiplatelet therapy must be done after a risk-benefit assessment, multidisciplinary collaboration, and stringent neurologic monitoring. The focus should be on prevention of a spinal hematoma, and rapid diagnosis and treatment to optimize the neurologic outcome.

Comparison of Clopidogrel, Prasugrel and Ticagrelor Response of Patients by PFA-100-Innovance Test Results

Devices such as stents and flow diverters require the use of safe and fast antiplatelet therapy. We aimed to compare the responses to clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor by assessing the Platelet Function Analysis (PFA-100)-Innovance test results of patients undergoing endovascular stenting to determine their resistance rates. Sixty-one women and 55 men, aged 18-87 years, were included in this study. Patients were divided into three groups: clopidogrel treatment, prasugrel treatment, and ticagrelor treatment. The systemic diseases of the patients, especially hypertension and diabetes, were recorded. The test results were evaluated according to the results for the collagen/epinephrine (COL-EPI), collagen/adenosine (COL-ADP), and P2Y results. The PFA-100-Innovance results for COL-EPI and P2Y were significantly higher for patients treated with prasugrel and ticagrelor compared with patients treated with clopidogrel (COL-EPI, p = 0.001; P2Y, p = 0.001). Clopidogrel resistance was identified in 31 patients (26.7%), and prasugrel resistance was identified in 4 patients (3.4%). Ticagrelor resistance was not detected. Therefore, 30.1% of patients were classified as drug-resistant. Perioperative bleeding was not detected in any patient. Hypertension was the most common disease recorded for patients being treated for cerebral aneurysm, and diabetes was the most common disease recorded for patients who underwent peripheral artery stenting (p = 0.002). Potent antiplatelet agents, such as prasugrel and ticagrelor, have a low rate of resistance but are associated with an increased bleeding risk. Thus, the choice of a suitable drug during the treatment window remains a critical factor when determining treatment strategies.

Use of Thromboelastography Platelet Mapping for Assessment of Individual Platelet Response Secondary to Oral Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Attempt to Start Personalized Antiplatelet Therapy in India

High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) with P2Y12 receptor antagonists in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is strongly associated with adverse ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This prospective study was conducted to assess individual platelet response and HPR to antiplatelet medications in post-PCI cases by thromboelastography platelet mapping (TEG-PM). Total 82 patients who were on aspirin and on either clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor were evaluated. The percentage of platelet inhibition to arachidonic acid (AA) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP) was calculated by [100-{(MA ADP/AA–MA Fibrin) / (MA Thrombin–MA Fibrin) × 100}], taking 50% response as cut-off for HPR. HPR to clopidogrel and prasugrel was 14.29 and 12.5%, respectively. No HPR was detected to aspirin and ticagrelor. The mean percentage of platelet inhibition was significantly higher in patients with ticagrelor 82.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) of [77.3, 88.7] as compared with clopidogrel 72.21, 95% CI of [65.3, 79.1] and prasugrel 64.2, 95% CI of [52.5, 75.9] (p-value of 0.041 and 0.003, respectively). Aspirin along with ticagrelor is associated with a higher mean percentage of platelet inhibition, and lower HPR as compared with the usage of aspirin combined with clopidogrel or prasugrel. Additionally, it might also be concluded that TEG-PM could be used effectively to measure the individual platelet functions which would make oral antiplatelet therapy more personalized for cardiac patients.

The role of viscoelastic testing in assessing peri-interventional platelet function and coagulation

We carried out a literature search in MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE literature databases to provide a concise review of the role of viscoelastic testing in assessing peri-interventional platelet function and coagulation. The search identified 130 articles that were relevant for the review, covering the basic science of VHA and VHA in clinical settings including cardiac surgery, cardiology, neurology, trauma, non-cardiac surgery, obstetrics, liver disease, and COVID-19. Evidence from these articles is used to describe the important role of VHAs and platelet function testing in various peri-interventional setups. VHAs can help us to comprehensively assess the contribution of platelets and coagulation dynamics to clotting at the site-of-care much faster than standard laboratory measures. In addition to standard coagulation tests, VHAs are beneficial in reducing allogeneic transfusion requirements and bleeding, in predicting ischemic events, and improving outcomes in several peri-interventional care settings. Further focused studies are needed to confirm their utility in the peri-interventional case.

Use of Thromboelastography Platelet Mapping for Assessment of Individual Platelet Response Secondary to Oral Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Attempt to Start Personalized Antiplatelet Therapy in India

High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) with P2Y12 receptor antagonists in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is strongly associated with adverse ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This prospective study was conducted to assess individual platelet response and HPR to antiplatelet medications in post-PCI cases by thromboelastography platelet mapping (TEG-PM). Total 82 patients who were on aspirin and on either clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor were evaluated. The percentage of platelet inhibition to arachidonic acid (AA) and adenosine disdiphosphate (ADP) was calculated by [100-{(MA ADP/AA–MA Fibrin) / (MA Thrombin–MA Fibrin) × 100}], taking 50% response as cut-off for HPR. HPR to clopidogrel and prasugrel was 14.29 and 12.5%, respectively. No HPR was detected to aspirin and ticagrelor. The mean percentage of platelet inhibition was significantly higher in patients with ticagrelor 82.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) of [77.3, 88.7] as compared with clopidogrel 72.21, 95% CI of [65.3, 79.1] and prasugrel 64.2, 95% CI of [52.5, 75.9] (p-value of 0.041 and 0.003, respectively). Aspirin along with ticagrelor is associated with a higher mean percentage of platelet inhibition, and lower HPR as compared with the usage of aspirin combined with clopidogrel or prasugrel. Additionally, it might also be concluded that TEG-PM could be used effectively to measure the individual platelet functions which would make oral antiplatelet therapy more personalized for cardiac patients.

Effect of discontinuation of ticagrelor and switching-over to other P2Y12 agents in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a single-center real-world experience from India

Background

Dual antiplatelet therapy is the current standard of care after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We intended to study the pattern of use of ticagrelor in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI and the effect of switching over to other P2Y12 receptor inhibition on clinical outcomes.

Results

All patients aged > 18 years who had been admitted with acute coronary syndrome and had been provided ticagrelor as the second antiplatelet agent were included as study participants. The primary outcome of the study was the composite outcome of death, recurrent myocardial infarctions, re-intervention, and major bleeding.

We studied 321 patients (54 female patients, 16.82%). The mean age of the patients was 56.65 ± 11.01 years. Ticagrelor was stopped in 76.7% on follow-up. It was stopped in 6.3%, 13.5%, 13.1%, 21.9%, and 45.1% of patients during the first month but after discharge, between first and third months, between 3 and 6 months, between 6 and 12 months, and after 12 months, respectively. In the majority of patients, ticagrelor was replaced by clopidogrel (97.9%). It was stopped according to the physician’s discretion in 79.3% of patients, whereas it was the cost of the drug that made the patient to get swapped to another agent in 18.6%. No difference in the primary composite outcome was observed between the groups where ticagrelor was continued post 12 months and ticagrelor was continued and ticagrelor was switched-over to another agent. Similarly, no difference in death, recurrent myocardial infarctions, re-interventions, or major bleeding manifestations was observed between the two groups.

Conclusion

In patients with acute coronary syndrome who undergo PCI, we observed that early discontinuation of ticagrelor and switching over to other P2Y12 inhibitors after discharge did not affect clinical outcomes.

De-escalation of anti-platelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a narrative review

Objective:

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In current clinical situation, availability of different oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) has enabled physicians to switch among therapies owing to specific clinical scenarios. Although optimum time, loading dose and interval of transition between P2Y₁₂ inhibitors is still controversial and needs further evidence, switching between oral inhibitors frequently occurs in clinical practice for several reasons.

Data sources:

This review was based on data in articles published in PubMed up to June 2018, with the following keywords “antiplatelet therapy”, “ACS”, “PCI”, “ticagrelor”, and “clopidogrel”.

Study selection:

Original articles and critical reviews on de-escalation strategy in ACS patients after PCI were selected. References of the retrieved articles were also screened to search for potentially relevant papers.

Results:

Safety concerns associated with switching between antiplatelet agents, has prompted the use of clopidogrel for patients with ACS especially after PCI as a de-escalation strategy. Practical considerations for de-escalating therapies in patients with ACS such as reducing dose of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors or shortening duration of DAPT (followed by aspirin or P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor monotherapy) as potential options are yet to be standardized and validated.

Conclusions:

Current review will provide an overview of the pharmacology of common P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, definitions of de-escalation and different de-escalating strategies and its outcomes, along with possible direction to be explored in de-escalation.

Platelet Function Testing in Neurovascular Procedures: Tool or Gimmick?

Background

Platelet inhibitors are used to prevent thromboembolic complications related to neurovascular stenting (NVS) procedures. Despite substantial inter-individual variability of functional platelet inhibition, the value of platelet function tests (PFT) to assess inhibition remains controversial.

Objective

This study was conducted to compare differences in thromboembolic complication rates associated with NVS in platelet-inhibited patients with and without PFT. Clinical neurological outcomes were assessed by differences in the modified Rankin Scale (mRS).

Materials and Methods

One hundred seventeen consecutive patients underwent elective NVS procedures within a 7-year period. All patients received aspirin and clopidogrel 8 days before the procedure. Fifty-two patients were treated without assessment of platelet inhibition, and 65 patients were tested for clopidogrel resistance. When clopidogrel resistance was revealed, corresponding patients were converted to ticagrelor. Changes in mRS and thromboembolic event rates were compared between the 2 cohorts.

Results

Thirty-five percent of patients from the cohort subjected to PFT tests showed inadequate platelet inhi-bition under clopidogrel and were converted to ticagrelor. Compared to the non-PFT test -cohort, neurological deficits were significantly reduced (12 vs. 0%; p = 0.009) and a lower number of thromboembolic events was found (12 vs. 3%; p > 0.05) within the test cohort.

Conclusion

PFT appears to identify patients with clopidogrel resistance prior to NVS procedures. When non-responders are converted to alternative platelet inhibitors, neurological outcomes and thromboembolic complication rates may improve. Consequently, this study provides preliminary evidence that PFT may be a useful clinical tool to enhance procedural safety and improve clinical outcomes in NVS procedures.