Back to Journals » Clinical Pharmacology: Advances and Applications » Volume 12

Impact of Routine Platelet Reactivity Testing with VerifyNow Assay on Antiplatelet Choice After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Authors Mshelbwala FS, Hugenberg DW, Kreutz RP

Received 17 December 2019

Accepted for publication 9 February 2020

Published 16 April 2020 Volume 2020:12 Pages 35—41

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CPAA.S242675

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Arthur Frankel


Fakilahyel S Mshelbwala, Daniel W Hugenberg, Rolf P Kreutz

Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA

Correspondence: Rolf P Kreutz
Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
Email rkreutz@iu.edu

Background: High on-treatment ADP platelet reactivity (HPR) measured by VerifyNow P2Y12 assay (VN) is an established risk factor for ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We hypothesized that routine use of VN at time of PCI in clinical practice may affect choice of P2Y12 antiplatelet therapy at discharge.
Methods: In a single center retrospective analysis, we examined the influence of VN testing on choice of P2Y12 inhibitor post PCI in routine clinical practice. Assessment of HPR was used routinely in clinical care during the time period of analysis at discretion of clinical providers. Subjects with PRU> 208 after the loading dose of clopidogrel or during clopidogrel steady state were switched to alternate P2Y12 inhibitors.
Results: We identified 1001 patients with PCI during the time period specified. A total of 252 subjects underwent VN testing. Among those, 43% were found to have HPR on clopidogrel and were switched to alternate therapies (prasugrel [n=60], ticagrelor [n=48]). Patients who had VN platelet function testing were more likely to be discharged on clopidogrel as compared to those who did not have VN assay done (57% vs. 50%, p=0.039). There was no significant difference in 1-year net-MACE (CVD, MI, stent thrombosis, BARC 2 or higher bleeding) using tailored antiplatelet therapy (VN testing) as compared to standard of care group (adjusted HR:0.92, 95% CI: 0.54– 1.5, p=0.74).
Conclusion: Routine use of VN assay in personalized antiplatelet treatment decision-making after PCI is associated with lower likelihood of using novel P2Y12 inhibitors.

Keywords: clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor, myocardial infarction

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]