Combination Antiplatelet Therapy with Aspirin and Clopidogrel: The Role of Antecedent and Concomitant Doses of Aspirin

Use of antiplatelet agents for prevention of ischemic stroke

Overall management to lower risk for ischemic stroke is multifaceted. Management includes measures to treat risk factors for accelerated atherosclerosis and stroke, antithrombotic therapies to lower the risk for thromboembolism, and surgery to treat a defined arterial or cardiac lesion. Treatment decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, with most patients receiving some combination of medication and recommendations for lifestyle modification. Some patients will also undergo surgical or endovascular interventions. This article discusses antithrombotic treatment for ischemic stroke prevention, placing major emphasis on the indications for and administration of antiplatelet therapy.

Different methodologies for evaluating the effect of clopidogrel on platelet function in high-risk coronary artery disease patients

BACKGROUND

Two point-of-care (POC) systems have been recently proposed as rapid tools with which to evaluate residual platelet reactivity (RPR) in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

We compared Platelet Function Analyzer-100 (PFA-100) closure times (CTs) by collagen/adenosine 5'-diphosphate (ADP) (C/ADP CT) cartridge and the VerifyNow P2Y12 Assay (VerifyNow) with light transmission aggregation (LTA) induced by 2 and 10 micromol L(-1) ADP in 1267 CAD patients on dual antiplatelet therapy who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. We also performed the vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation assay by cytofluorimetric analysis in a subgroup of 115 patients.

RESULTS

Cut-off values for identifying RPR were: > or = 54% and > or = 66% for LTA induced by 2 and 10 micromol L(-1) ADP respectively, and > or = 264 P2Y12 Reaction Units (PRU) for VerifyNow. The cut-off for PFA-100 C/ADP CT was > or = 68 s. RPR was detected in 25.1% of patients by 2 mumol L(-1) ADP-induced LTA (ADP-LTA), in 23.2% by 10 micromol L(-1) ADP-LTA, in 24.4% by PFA-100, and in 24.7% by VerifyNow. PFA-100 results did not parallel those obtained with LTA. VerifyNow showed a significant correlation (rho = 0.62, P < 0.001) and significant agreement (k = 0.34, P < 0.001) with LTA induced by 2 micromol L(-1) ADP. The correlation was similar but the agreement was better between VerifyNow and 10 micromol L(-1) ADP-LTA (rho = 0.64, P < 0.0001; k = 0.43, P < 0.001). Significant relationships were found between VASP platelet reactivity index and both ADP-LTA and VerifyNow. PFA-100 C/ADP CT did not significantly correlate with any of the other assays.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show a significant correlation between LTA and VerifyNow but not the PFA-100 C/ADP assay. Clinical validation studies for POC systems are necessary.