Measurement of antiplatelet inhibition during neurointerventional procedures: the effect of antithrombotic duration and loading dose

Efficacy and safety of single versus dual antiplatelet therapy in carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet (AP) therapy (DAPT) before carotid artery stenting (CAS); however, the true clinical effect of single AP therapy vs DAPT is unknown. We examined the efficacy and safety of preoperative single AP therapy vs DAPT in patients who had undergone transfemoral CAS (tfCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR).

METHODS

We identified all patients who had undergone tfCAS or TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative database from 2016 to 2021. We stratified the patients by procedure and identified those who had received the following preoperative AP regimens: DAPT (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA] + P2Y12 inhibitor [P2Yi]), no AP therapy, ASA only, ASA + AP loading dose, P2Yi only, and P2Yi + AP loading dose. The AP loading dose was given within 4 hours of CAS. We generated propensity scores for each treatment regimen and assessed in-hospital outcomes using inverse probability weighted log binomial regression, with DAPT as the reference and adjusting for intraoperative protamine use. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite end point of stroke and death, and the primary safety outcome was access-related bleeding.

RESULTS

Of the 18,570 tfCAS patients, 70% had received DAPT, 5.6% no AP therapy, 10% ASA only, 8.0% ASA + AP loading dose, 4.6% P2Yi only, and 2.9% P2Yi + AP loading dose. The corresponding unadjusted rates of stroke/death were 2.2%, 6.8%, 4.1%, 5.1%, 2.4%, and 2.3%. After adjustment, compared with DAPT, the incidence of stroke/death was higher with no AP therapy (relative risk [RR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-3.2), ASA only (RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1), and ASA + AP loading dose (RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5-2.7) but was similar with P2Yi only (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.58-1.7) and P2Yi + AP loading dose (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.49-2.5). Of the 25,459 TCAR patients, 81% had received DAPT, 2.0% no AP therapy, 5.5% ASA only, 3.5% ASA + AP loading dose, 4.9% P2Yi only, and 2.4% P2Yi + AP loading dose. The corresponding unadjusted rates of stroke/death were 1.5%, 3.3%, 3.3%, 2.9%, 1.2%, and 1.1%. After adjustment, compared with DAPT, the incidence of stroke/death was higher with no AP therapy (RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.3) and ASA only (RR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.5-3.1), with a trend toward a higher incidence with ASA + AP loading dose (RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.99-2.6), and was similar with P2Yi only (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.54-1.8) and P2Yi + AP loading dose (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.6). No differences were found in the incidence of access-related bleeding between the treatment groups after tfCAS or TCAR.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with DAPT, no AP therapy or ASA monotherapy was associated with higher rates of stroke/death after CAS and should be discouraged as unsafe practice. Meanwhile, P2Yi monotherapy was associated with similar rates of stroke/death. No differences were found in the incidence of bleeding complications, and adding an AP loading dose to ASA or P2Yi monotherapy within 4 hours of the procedure did not affect the outcomes. Overall, these findings support the current guidelines recommending DAPT before CAS but also suggest that P2Yi monotherapy might confer thromboembolic benefits similar to those with DAPT. However, an immediate preoperative AP loading dose might not provide additional thromboembolic benefits.

Efficacy and safety of perioperative dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in carotid artery stenting

BACKGROUND

Clopidogrel resistance is associated with increased periprocedural neurologic events after carotid artery stenting (CAS). Ticagrelor offers an improved resistance profile; however, its bleeding risk has not been assessed with CAS. Therefore, we examined the efficacy and safety of perioperative dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin/ticagrelor vs aspirin/clopidogrel in patients undergoing transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR).

METHODS

We identified all patients who underwent tfCAS or TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry from January 2016 to March 2021. We stratified patients by procedure and assessed outcomes using 1:3 propensity score-matched cohorts of patients who received perioperative aspirin/ticagrelor vs aspirin/clopidogrel. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint of in-hospital stroke/death, and the primary safety outcome was access-related bleeding. As a secondary analysis, we assessed these outcomes after stratifying each cohort by intraoperative protamine use.

RESULTS

Among 17,731 tfCAS patients, 593 (3.3%) received aspirin/ticagrelor and 11,404 (64%) received aspirin/clopidogrel. For the 2065 matched patients, no significant differences were found in the composite endpoint of stroke/death (aspirin/ticagrelor, 4.1%; vs aspirin/clopidogrel, 2.6%; relative risk [RR],1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-2.7) or in the individual endpoints of stroke (2.9% vs 1.8%; RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.87-3.0) or death (1.7% vs 1.1%; RR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.71-3.5). However, aspirin/ticagrelor was associated with a higher risk of bleeding (5.8% vs 2.8%; RR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2). In a subgroup analysis of 297 tfCAS patients (14%) who received intraoperative protamine, no differences remained in stroke/death (1.5% vs 3.9%; RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.05-3.0), and there was no longer a difference in bleeding (3.0% vs 2.6%; RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.24-5.5). Among 17,946 TCAR patients, 453 (2.5%) received aspirin/ticagrelor and 13,696 (76%) received aspirin/clopidogrel. For the 1618 matched patients, no differences were found in stroke/death (0.7% vs 1.4%; RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.16-1.8), stroke (0.2% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-1.5), death (0.5% vs 0.2%; RR, 3.0; 95% CI, 0.42-21), or bleeding (1.2% vs 1.6%; RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.28-2.0). For the 1429 TCAR patients (88%) who received protamine, no differences were found in stroke/death (0.8% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.20-2.4) or bleeding (0.6% vs 1.4%; RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.09-1.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with aspirin/clopidogrel, aspirin/ticagrelor was associated with a potentially lower risk of stroke/death and bleeding complications after CAS in cases in which protamine was used but a higher risk of these outcomes in the absence of protamine. Given our limited sample size, our analysis should be repeated when more patients are available for study. However, our findings suggest that aspirin/ticagrelor could be a reasonable alternative to aspirin/clopidogrel for both tfCAS and TCAR when protamine is used.

Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor for Antiplatelet Therapy in Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR) in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) with dynamic flow reversal is a hybrid technique for operative management of carotid artery stenosis. Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended for patients undergoing TCAR; however, nonresponders to these medications may be predisposed to perioperative thromboembolic complications. Prevalent in up to 44-66% of patients taking clopidogrel, high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) may thus be responsible for a portion of adverse cerebrovascular events in TCAR. A previous single-institution study has demonstrated the use of ticagrelor as a viable alternative to clopidogrel for antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing TCAR; however, large-scale comparisons between clopidogrel and ticagrelor are needed to confirm the safety of ticagrelor outside of highly selected patients and providers.

METHODS

Data from patients enrolled in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative undergoing TCAR with a perioperative antiplatelet therapy regimen including either clopidogrel or ticagrelor from January 2015 to March 2021 were analyzed and compared. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to evaluate the primary 30-day outcomes of stroke, major bleeding event, and combined stroke/myocardial infarction (MI)/death rate while adjusting for baseline characteristics of the patients.

RESULTS

A total of 11973 patients underwent TCAR with a dual antiplatelet therapy regimen that included clopidogrel versus 426 patients with ticagrelor. Compared to clopidogrel, patients on ticagrelor were significantly more likely to have coronary artery disease (51% vs 66% [P = <.001]), particularly unstable angina or MI within 6 months (3% vs 9% [P = <.001]), and more likely to have insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (14% vs 19% [P = <.001]). The unadjusted 30-day rates of stroke, major bleeding, and combined stroke/MI/death were not statistically significant among both groups (1.3% vs 0.5% [P = .14], 2.4% vs 1.4% [P = .18], and 1.9% vs 1.6% [P = .71], respectively). After multivariable adjustment and propensity matching, these remained statistically insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a substantially higher medical risk in patients undergoing TCAR with ticagrelor, 30-day rates of stroke, major bleeding events, and combined stroke/MI/death were similar between patients on ticagrelor and clopidogrel as part of adjunctive antiplatelet therapy. Randomized prospective trials, and studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up will be needed to better examine the outcome differences in TCAR between these two medications.

Safety of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Interventional Neuroradiology: Current Status and Perspectives

In the field of interventional neuroradiology, antiplatelet agents are commonly used to prepare patients before the implantation of permanent endovascular materials. Among the available drugs, clopidogrel is the most frequently used one, but resistance phenomena are considered to be relatively common. Prasugrel and ticagrelor were recently added to the pharmacologic arsenal, but the safety of these agents in patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures is still a subject of discussion. The cumulative experience with both drugs is less extensive than that with clopidogrel, and the experience with patients in the neurology field is less extensive than in the cardiology domain. In the present article, we provide a narrative review of studies that investigated safety issues of oral P2Y12 inhibitors in interventional neuroradiology and discuss potential routes for future research.

Association between CYP2C19 polymorphisms and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing stent procedure for cerebral artery stenosis

We investigated the effect of CYP2C19 polymorphisms on the clinical outcomes of clopidogrel therapy in patients after stenting procedure for cerebral artery stenosis in northeast China. 568 patients performed CYP2C19 genotype screening in the neurosurgery department of our hospital; 154 patients were finally recruited according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and followed-up for 6 months. Ischemic events including (1) transient ischemic attack (TIA); (2) stent thrombosis; (3) ischemic stroke; and (4) death were defined as primary clinical endpoints. The frequencies of CYP2C19*1, *2 and *3 alleles in 568 patients were 63.1%, 31.1% and 5.8%, respectively. 154 patients were classified into extensive (65 patients; 42.2%), intermediate (66 patients; 42.9%), and poor (23 patients; 14.9%) metabolizer groups. A χ2 test showed a significant difference in primary clinical endpoints at 6 months (P = 0.04), and a multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that the CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) alleles associated with post-procedure prognosis. The Kaplan-Meier curve revealed that there was no significant difference in ischemic events between *2 and *3 alleles carriers. Our study verifies that CYP2C19 *2 and *3 have significant impact on the clinical outcomes of clopidogrel therapy in patients with stenting procedure for cerebral artery stenosis in China.

Efficacy of Monitoring for Multiple Antiplatelet Therapy during Intracranial Stent Placement: A Preliminary Study

Objective

During cerebral aneurysm embolization using intracranial stents, platelet aggregation increases owing to increased wall shear stress and a loss of vascular endothelial function at the stent implantation site. Preoperative multiple antiplatelet therapy was introduced to prevent severe thromboembolic complications due to increased platelet aggregation. However, specific guidelines for the administration and pharmacological evaluation of this therapy do not exist currently. We examined the benefits of perioperative platelet aggregation monitoring in a cohort of patients.

Methods

We had 377 patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms who underwent stent-assisted embolization at our hospital between December 2012 and November 2019. We ultimately included 181 patients in our final analysis. These patients were continuously administered aspirin (100 mg/day) and clopidogrel (75 mg/day) for more than 5 days before the procedure to the post-procedural period. Of these patients, 30 patients who underwent light transmission aggregometry (LTA) before procedure, post-procedure (3 days after procedure), and at first post-discharge clinic visit were included as the subjects. The following characteristics were studied: age; sex; presence/absence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and/or diabetes mellitus; location of aneurysm; type/number of stent; technique for stent placement; duration of preoperative multiple antiplatelet therapy; perioperative platelet aggregation test results; and postoperative ischemic or hemorrhagic complications.

Results

Among these 30 patients, the median duration of antiplatelet therapy prior to the preoperative platelet aggregation measurements was 7 (interquartile range [IQR]: 6-8) days, and post-discharge measurement of LTA was performed at a median period of 27 (IQR: 22-35.5) days after procedure. The preoperative, postoperative, and first post-discharge clinic visit LTA values for adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation were 50% (IQR: 44-54%), 42.5% (IQR: 36-48%), and 36% (IQR: 32-40%), respectively. These results represented gradual decrease in LTA values and a significant difference between the preoperative and post-discharge values. The LTA values for collagen aggregation showed a significant difference evident between the preoperative and post-discharge values; preoperative 38% (IQR: 27-60%), postoperative 42% (IQR: 30-58%), post-discharge 28% (IQR: 20-42%), respectively. We had one thromboembolic complication and one hemorrhagic complication. The results indicated that appropriate platelet aggregation monitoring during multiple antiplatelet therapy prevents thromboembolic complications such as stent thrombosis. However, we also found that many patients demonstrated increased postoperative platelet aggregation inhibitory effects due to the postoperative continuation of the same multiple antiplatelet therapy that was used preoperatively.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that postoperative, continuous, oral antiplatelet therapy induces increased platelet aggregation inhibition effects, which may lead to hemorrhagic complications. Therefore, continued platelet aggregation monitoring after surgery may be important to allow for any necessary alterations to the therapeutic dose and regimen.

Antiplatelet Management for Stent-Assisted Coiling and Flow Diversion of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A DELPHI Consensus Statement

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is a paucity of data regarding antiplatelet management strategies in the setting of stent-assisted coiling/flow diversion for ruptured intracranial aneurysms. This study aimed to identify current challenges in antiplatelet management during stent-assisted coiling/flow diversion for ruptured intracranial aneurysms and to outline possible antiplatelet management strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The modified DELPHI approach with an on-line questionnaire was sent in several iterations to an international, multidisciplinary panel of 15 neurointerventionalists. The first round consisted of open-ended questions, followed by closed-ended questions in the subsequent rounds. Responses were analyzed in an anonymous fashion and summarized in the final manuscript draft. The statement received endorsement from the World Federation of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, the Japanese Society for Neuroendovascular Therapy, and the Chinese Neurosurgical Society.

RESULTS

Data were collected from December 9, 2019, to March 13, 2020. Panel members achieved consensus that platelet function testing may not be necessary and that antiplatelet management for stent-assisted coiling and flow diversion of ruptured intracranial aneurysms can follow the same principles. Preprocedural placement of a ventricular drain was thought to be beneficial in cases with a high risk of hydrocephalus. A periprocedural dual, intravenous, antiplatelet regimen with aspirin and a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor was preferred as a standard approach. The panel agreed that intravenous medication can be converted to oral aspirin and an oral P2Y12 inhibitor within 24 hours after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

More and better data on antiplatelet management of patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms undergoing stent-assisted coiling or flow diversion are urgently needed. Panel members in this DELPHI consensus study preferred a periprocedural dual-antiplatelet regimen with aspirin and a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor.

Outcomes and strategy of tailored antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor in patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization

OBJECTIVE

Antiplatelet drug resistance is associated with periprocedural ischemic complications in patients undergoing intravascular stent implantation. Nonresponders are subject to increased risk of stent thrombosis and in-stent stenosis, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) is present in up to 44% of patients taking clopidogrel, a widely used component of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Evidence points to ticagrelor as a viable alternative to overcome HTPR on clopidogrel. Studies have shown fewer thromboembolic events with ticagrelor therapy; however, results on bleeding risk are mixed, and its safety and efficacy in hybrid operative techniques have yet to be established. Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is a hybrid procedure to treat severe carotid stenosis. The objective of this study was to establish the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor as part of DAPT in patients undergoing TCAR and to develop a protocol to ensure adequate antithrombotic protection throughout the operative course.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively for patients undergoing TCAR on DAPT of aspirin and ticagrelor for symptomatic (≥50%) or asymptomatic (≥80%) carotid stenosis. Preoperative platelet reactivity was determined using Thromboelastography with Platelet Mapping (Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, Mass), with adequate platelet reactivity defined as maximal amplitude produced by adenosine diphosphate <50 mm. The primary safety end point was 30-day major bleeding event rate. Primary efficacy end points were 30-day incidence of ipsilateral cerebrovascular ischemic event (stroke or transient ischemic attack), myocardial infarction, and death. Secondary end points were postoperative length of hospital stay, procedure time, and clamp/flow reversal time.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven TCAR procedures with patients receiving periprocedural DAPT of ticagrelor and aspirin were performed during the study period. Patients had an average age of 79 years, and 28 (42%) were symptomatic. The mean procedure time was 45.8 ± 9.2 minutes, with a mean clamp/flow reversal time of 4.8 ± 1.5 minutes, and mean postoperative length of hospital stay of 3.1 ± 2.2 days for inpatients and 1.3 ± 0.8 days for outpatients. Technical success was achieved in all cases, with no 30-day major bleeding events and no occurrence of ipsilateral cerebrovascular ischemic event, myocardial infarction, or death.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial experience with ticagrelor as part of DAPT in patients undergoing TCAR demonstrated its safety and efficacy in both symptomatic and asymptomatic disease. No bleeding events or thromboembolic complications occurred. Furthermore, a protocol to administer ticagrelor to assay for HTPR on ticagrelor and consequent medication and patient management is proposed. Ticagrelor may represent a safe and effective alternative to overcome clopidogrel nonresponsiveness in DAPT regimens for TCAR.

Comparison of Clopidogrel and Ticlopidine/Ginkgo Biloba in Patients With Clopidogrel Resistance and Carotid Stenting

Background and Purpose: Patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) who show low responsiveness to clopidogrel may have a higher risk of peri-procedural embolic events. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of clopidogrel and ticlopidine plus Ginkgo biloba in clopidogrel-resistant patients undergoing CAS.

Methods: In this multi-center, randomized, controlled trial, we used platelet reactivity test to select patients undergoing CAS who showed clopidogrel resistance, and compared treatments using clopidogrel and ticlopidine plus ginkgo. The primary outcome was the incidence of new ischemic lesion in the ipsilateral hemisphere of CAS. Detection of microembolic signal on transcranial Doppler was the secondary outcome. The clinical outcomes were also monitored.

Results: This trial was discontinued after 42 patients were randomized after preplanned interim sample size re-estimation indicated an impractical sample size. The primary endpoint occurred in 12/22 patients (54.5%) in the clopidogrel group and 13/20 patients (65.0%) in the ticlopidine–ginkgo group (P = 0.610). No significant differences in the presence of microembolic signal (15.0 vs. 11.8%, P = 0.580), clinical outcomes (ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, 0.0 vs. 5.5%; acute myocardial infarction 0.0 vs. 0.0%; all-cause death, 4.5 vs. 0.0%), or incidence of adverse events were found in the two groups. In terms of resistance to clopidogrel, treatment with ticlopidine–ginkgo significantly increased the P2Y12 Reaction Units (difference, 0.0 [−0.3–3.0] vs. 21.0 [6.0–35.0], P < 0.001).

Conclusions: In patients who showed clopidogrel resistance, ticlopidine–ginkgo treatment was safe and increased P2Y12 Reaction Units; however, compared to clopidogrel, it failed to improve surrogate and clinical endpoints in patients undergoing CAS. This multimodal biomarker-based clinical trial is feasible in neurointerventional research.

Clinical Trial Registration:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02133989.

Variability of Platelet Reactivity on Antiplatelet Therapy in Neurointervention Procedure

As more intracranial aneurysms and other cerebrovascular pathologies are treated with neurointervention procedure, thromboembolic events that frequently lead to serious neurological deficit or fatal outcomes are increasing. In order to prevent the thromboembolic events, antiplatelet therapy is used in most procedures including coil embolization, stenting, and flow diversion. However, because of variable individual pharmacodynamics responses to antiplatelet drugs, especially clopidogrel, it is difficult for clinicians to select the adequate antiplatelet regimen and its optimal dose. This article reviews the neurointervention literature related to antiplatelet therapy and suggests a strategy for tailoring antiplatelet therapy in individual patients undergoing neurointervention based on the results of platelet function testing.

Management of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing neuroendovascular procedures

Neuroendovascular techniques for treating cerebral aneurysms and other cerebrovascular pathology are increasingly becoming the standard of care. Intraluminal stents, aneurysm coils, and other flow diversion devices typically require concomitant antiplatelet therapy to reduce thromboembolic complications. The variability inherent with the pharmacodynamic response to common antiplatelet agents such as aspirin and clopidogrel complicates optimal selection of antiplatelet agents by clinicians. This review serves to discuss the literature related to antiplatelet use in neuroendovascular procedures and provides recommendations for clinicians on how to approach patients with variable response to antiplatelet agents, particularly clopidogrel.

Prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel

The existence of poor biological response to clopidogrel has been shown in some patients. Despite the increasing number of studies, this phenomenon remains difficult to quantify. We performed a systematic review to estimate the prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel and investigate the factors known to modulate this. An exhaustive search was performed. Altogether 171 publications were identified, providing data for a total of 45,664 subjects. The estimated prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel ranged from 15.9% to 49.5% according to the platelet function assay employed. The assays most frequently used were light transmittance aggregometry (LTA), the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) assay and the Verify -now® assay. For all these assays, higher cut-off values were associated with a lower prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel. However, when choosing a fixed cut-off point for each assay, the prevalence of poor biological response to clopidogrel was highly variable suggesting that other factors could modulate poor biological response to clopidogrel. Finally, none of the studied factors could apparently explain the variability of poor biological response to clopidogrel. This meta-analysis shows that the prevalence of poor biological response depends on the assay employed, the cut-off value and on various unidentified additional factors.

Potential Usefulness of Clopidogrel Pharmacogenetics in Cerebral Endovascular Procedures and Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND

Previous reports have shown inadequate response to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and clopidogrel in 5-30% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), due mostly to clopidogrel resistance. This prevalence increases up to 66% in patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures. However, clinical significance of CYP2C19 genotypes in neurointerventional procedures or carotid artery stenting (CAS) is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to update our current knowledge and understanding of the pharmacogenetic basis for poor clopidogrel responsiveness in patients undergoing CAS and endovascular interventions as well as to explore usefulness of genotyping to reduce the rate of procedure-related thrombosis that results in ischemic complications.

METHOD

A literature search for pharmacogenetic studies in cerebral endovascular interventions and CAS was conducted on three databases using a list of the most relevant pharmacogenetic biomarkers.

RESULTS

The review included 7 papers involving 3 genetic polymorphisms on CYP2C19 and 442 subjects. Patients harboring at least one loss-of-function CYP2C19 polymorphism (e.g., CYP2C19*2 and *3) are at an increased risk of thromboembolic complications such as stent thrombosis following neurointerventional procedures. Notably, patients who carry the gain-of-function CYP2C19*17 allele may have increased risk of ischemic events following endovascular treatment, independent of clopidogrel responsiveness.

CONCLUSION

Studies assessing the influence of CYP2C19 polymorphisms on high on-treatment platelet reactivity in CAS and cerebrovascular disease patients are still limited and need further validation in large multicenter studies. This review covers an important topic in the field of antiplatelet therapy for cerebral endovascular procedures and CAS.

Endovascular treatment of unruptured aneurysms of cavernous and ophthalmic segment of internal carotid artery with flow diverter device Pipeline

BACKGROUND

Intra-arterial treatment of aneurysms by redirecting blood flow is a newer method. The redirection is based on a significantly more densely braided wire stent. The stent wall keeps the blood in the lumen of the stent and slows down the turbulent flow in the aneurysms. Stagnation of blood in the aneurysm sac leads to the formation of thrombus and subsequent exclusion of the aneurysm from the circulation. The aim of the study was to evaluate flow diverter device Pipeline for broad neck and giant aneurysm treatment.

METHODS

Fifteen patients with discovered aneurysm of the internal carotid artery were treated between November 2010 and February 2014. The majority of aneurysms of the internal carotid artery were located intradural at the ophthalmic part of the artery. The patients were treated using a flow diverter device Pipeline, which was placed over the aneurysm neck. Treatment success was assessed clinically and angiographically using O'Kelly Marotta scale.

RESULTS

Control angiography immediately after the release of the stent showed stagnation of the blood flow in the aneurysm sac. In none of the patients procedural and periprocedural complications were observed. 6 months after the procedure, control CT or MR angiography showed in almost all cases exclusion of the aneurysm from the circulation and normal blood flow in the treated artery. Neurological status six months after the procedure was normal in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of aneurysms with flow diverter Pipeline device is a safe and significantly less time consuming method in comparison with standard techniques. This new method is a promising approach in treatment of broad neck aneurysms.

Association between CYP2C19 Polymorphisms and Outcomes in Cerebral Endovascular Therapy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Differing responses to clopidogrel following endovascular treatment of cerebrovascular diseases may increase the risk of vascular complications. CYP2C19 gene polymorphisms influence clopidogrel activity. We aimed to study the clinical impact of CYP2C19 gene polymorphisms in patients undergoing endovascular treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational study. Information on demographics and cerebrovascular status was collected as baseline. Clopidogrel response was tested by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. CYP2C19 genotyping was undertaken by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism. Three-month follow-up data included vascular complications, mortality, and modified Rankin Scale score. Associations were investigated among CYP2C19 genotypes, clopidogrel responsiveness, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight participants were included. Median age was 56 years (interquartile range, 48.8-65.0 years), and 35 (32.4%) were male. Forty-four participants were classified into group 1 (homozygous CYP2C19*1/*1); 31, into group 2 (25 with CYP2C19*1/*2, two with CYP2C19*1/*3, three with CYP2C19*3/*3, one with CYP2C19*2/*3); 28, into group 3 (24 with CYP2C19*1/*17, four with CYP2C19*17/*17); and 5, into group 4 (CYP2C19*2/*17). A significantly higher proportion of participants in group 3 experienced ischemic events (9 of 28, 32.1%) compared with group 1 (5 of 44, 11.4%; P = .04; odds ratio, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-12.6). There was no significant difference in clopidogrel response among the 4 genotype groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with CYP2C19*17 may have increased risk of ischemic events following endovascular treatment, independent of clopidogrel responsiveness. Larger studies are required to confirm the influence of CYP2C19*17 on clinical outcomes and to understand the mechanisms for increased ischemic events.

Neurointerventional Stenting and Antiplatelet Function Testing: To Do or Not to Do?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Platelet function testing in neurointerventional (NI) procedures is still controversial. We compared the clinical outcomes between antiplatelet responders and nonresponders based on the results of the VerifyNow (VN) testing method.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-center analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent NI stenting procedures from January 2007 through July 2013 and had documented preprocedural aspirin (ASA) and clopidogrel VN assays. Patients were divided into two groups based on their responsiveness to antiplatelet. Baseline characteristics, good functional outcome measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days, combined procedural complication rate defined as postprocedural stroke, in-stent thrombosis, and intraoperative rupture were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 37 patients: 26 were in the responder group (RG) and 11 were in the nonresponder group (NRG). Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Even though the combined complication rate was similar between the two groups [NRG: 2/11 (18%) vs. RG: 2/26 (7%); p = 0.33], there was a trend for a higher rate of good functional outcome (90-day mRS: 0-2) in the RG (22/22, 100%) as compared to the NRG (8/10, 80%) (p = 0.0907).

CONCLUSION

Overall, utilizing the VN antiplatelet function testing did not significantly change the clinical outcome after the NI procedures. Larger randomized trials are warranted to provide a better understanding of the utility of the antiplatelet testing in NI stenting procedures.

Genetic determinations of variable responsiveness to clopidogrel and implications for neurointerventional procedures

Endovascular intervention is emerging as a substitute for open surgical procedures for the treatment of cerebrovascular disease. However, up to 9% of patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures develop thromboembolic complications. Strategies to reduce periprocedural thromboembolic events are dominated by the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) which has been validated based on studies of peripheral vascular and coronary intervention. Of note, DAT decreases adverse vascular outcomes by 75-80% in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It follows that similar treatment effects would be observed in neurointerventional populations. However, a growing body of evidence demonstrates that a subgroup of patients respond suboptimally to DAT, and in particular to clopidogrel (termed clopidogrel hyporesponders). These patients may be at an increased risk of thromboembolic complications such as in-stent thrombosis following neurointerventional procedures. Previous studies report 5-30% suboptimal response to clopidogrel in the cardiovascular population, while a higher prevalence is seen in populations undergoing neurointerventional procedures, i.e. as much as 66%. Knowledge of the mechanism leading to clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness is accumulating. A number of genetic polymorphisms, in particular CYP 2C19*2, have been associated with clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness and clinical outcomes. In addition, there are significant differences in the prevalence of CYP 2C19*2 across racial groups. Approximately 50% of Asians and 25% of Caucasians harbor the CYP 2C19*2 allele. While no prospective randomized trials currently exist to demonstrate improved clinical outcomes with genotype-based treatment for carriers of the CYP 2C19*2 polymorphism, a number of studies show that an increased dose of clopidogrel improves platelet inhibition in hyporesponders. The aim of the review is to examine the current understanding of the genetic basis of clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness in patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures and to explore current efforts using genotype and phenotype testing as well as alternative strategies to overcome the clopidogrel hyporesponsiveness.

Balloons and stents in the endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms: vascular anatomy remodeled

Wide-neck intracranial aneurysms were originally thought to be either untreatable or very challenging to treat by endovascular means because of the risk of coil protrusion into the parent vessel. The introduction of the balloon remodeling technique (BRT) and later stents specifically designed for intracranial use has progressively allowed these lesions to be endovascularly treated. BRT and stent-assisted coiling technique (SACT) were first designed to treat sidewall aneurysms but, with gained experience and further technical refinement, bifurcation complex-shaped wide-neck aneurysms have been treated by coiling enhanced by BRT and SACT. In this article, we will review and describe the inherent benefits and drawbacks of BRT as well as SACT.

Incidence of microemboli and correlation with platelet inhibition in aneurysmal flow diversion

Flow-diverting stents have been associated with embolic and hemorrhagic complications, but the rate of procedure-related microemboli is unknown. Using transcranial Doppler sonography, we measured the rate of microemboli in 23 patients treated with flow-diverting stents. Patients received preprocedural dual antiplatelet medications and intraprocedural heparinization. Point-of-care platelet reactivity testing was performed before the procedure, and nonresponders (>213 P2Y12/ADP receptor reactivity units) received additional thienopyridine. Transcranial Doppler sonography was performed within 12-24 hours. Microemboli were detected in 3 patients (13%), 2 of whom were initially nonresponders. There was no association between the presence of microemboli and procedural or neurologic complications, aneurysm size, number of stents, or procedure time. Eight procedures (34.8%) required additional thienopyridine for inadequate platelet inhibition, and 3 required further treatment for persistent nonresponse to point-of-care platelet reactivity testing. There were 6 technical and 2 postoperative complications; none were associated with inadequate platelet inhibition or microemboli. The combination of routine point-of-care platelet reactivity testing and postprocedural microembolic monitoring may help identify patients at risk for thromboembolic complications after flow-diverting stents.

Assessment of platelet inhibition by point-of-care testing in neuroendovascular procedures

Antiplatelet agents are an important component of the preventive strategies currently used in clinical practice to minimize the risk of thromboembolic events during and after endovascular procedures. Because of the variability in the response to antiplatelet agents, measuring the degree of platelet inhibition may help identify and properly treat poor responders. POC testing is defined as diagnostic testing at or near the site of patient care. Knowledge of the specifics of these devices among practicing neurointerventionalists is relatively limited. In this article, the different POC devices available are presented, and their clinical utility in relation to endovascular procedures is discussed.

Off-label use of drugs and devices in the neuroendovascular suite

SUMMARY

The off-label use of drugs and devices in neuroendovascular procedures is common. Neurointerventionalists should be well aware of the level of evidence available in support of the off-label use of drugs and devices in their practice and some of the potential adverse events associated with them. These uses are categorized as I or II if they have been evaluated as primary or ancillary interventions in prospective trials/registries of neuroendovascular procedures and III if they were evaluated in case series. Category IV use is based on evaluation as primary or ancillary interventions in prospective trials/registries of non-neuroendovascular procedures. Physicians are allowed to use off-label drugs and procedures if there is strong evidence that they are beneficial for the patient. The neurointerventional professional societies agree that off-label use of drugs and devices is an important part of the specialty, but practicing providers should base their decisions on sound evidence when using such drugs and devices.

Acute intracranial in-stent thrombosis after angioplasty of middle cerebral artery symptomatic stenosis: a case report

INTRODUCTION

Intracranial atherosclerotic disease is one of the major risk factors of ischemic stroke. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with stent deployment may be effective for the treatment of symptomatic intracranial stenosis, however its value is yet to be determined. High possibility of serious periprocedural complications, such as acute in-stent thrombosis or stroke, narrows the current recommendations for this treatment to patients with high-grade stenosis (>70%), and to experienced neurointerventional centers.

CASE REPORT

We present a 44-year-old male with symptomatic high-grade stenosis of the M1 segment of left middle cerebral artery, treated with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with stenting. The procedure was complicated with acute in-stent thrombosis treated with intra-arterial thrombolysis, which resulted in a nondisabling stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedure-related stroke in this patient was probably caused by middle cerebral artery perforator ostium occlusion with balloon predilatation and transient in-stent thrombosis related to insufficient antiplatelet pretreatment. Exhausted cerebrovascular reserve due to long-lasting high-grade intracranial stenosis should also be considered as a factor contributing to ischemic complications.

Antiplatelet resistance and thromboembolic complications in neurointerventional procedures

Antiplatelet resistance is emerging as a significant factor in effective secondary stroke prevention. Prevalence of aspirin and clopidogrel resistance is dependent upon laboratory test and remains contentious. Large studies in cardiovascular disease populations have demonstrated worse ischemic outcomes in patients with antiplatelet resistance, particularly in patients with coronary stents. Thromboembolism is a complication of neurointerventional procedures that leads to stroke. Stroke rates related to aneurysm coiling range from 2 to 10% and may be higher when considering silent ischemia. Stroke associated with carotid stenting is a major cause of morbidity. Antiplatelet use in the periprocedure setting varies among different centers. No guidelines exist for use of antiplatelet regimens in neurointerventional procedures. Incidence of stroke in patients post procedure may be partly explained by resistance to antiplatelet agents. Further research is required to establish the incidence of stroke in patients with antiplatelet resistance undergoing neurointerventional procedures.

Microembolic signal monitoring after coiling of unruptured cerebral aneurysms: an observational analysis of 123 cases

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Thromboembolic events after aneurysm coiling are common, but the optimal algorithm for emboli prevention remains unclear. MESs correlate with the occurrence of impending ischemic events and may be used for management guidance. This study reports the use of MES monitoring with regard to aneurysm characteristics and coiling technique after a specific anticoagulation protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed 123 consecutive, elective endovascular procedures. Patients received intraprocedural and continuous heparin if feasible. Demographic data, aneurysm size, type of intervention/complication, medication, imaging, and clinical outcome were analyzed. MES monitoring was performed in all patients both immediately after as well as >12 hours after the procedure.

RESULTS

Heparinization within the first 12 hours was associated with lower numbers of MESs early after coiling (3.4 versus 18.8 MESs/hr). When on heparin, larger aneurysm size, stent-assisted procedures, or incomplete occlusion did not lead to a significant increase in MESs. If the initial MES count on heparin was >10 MESs/hr, it was always safe to discontinue heparin. Inability to initiate early, continuous heparinization was associated with new neurologic deficits. Additional administration of antiplatelet agents showed lower MES counts initially, but the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

MES monitoring is a powerful adjunct to monitor efficacy of treatment algorithms for emboli prevention after coiling. In our series, early heparinization was associated with a lower incidence of MESs. This is of particular importance in larger aneurysms, stent-assisted procedures, and incomplete occlusions, in which the thromboembolic risk is greatest early on and antiplatelet treatment alone may not suffice.