Suppr超能文献

比较六种主要血小板功能测试以确定稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者中阿司匹林抵抗的发生率。

A comparison of six major platelet function tests to determine the prevalence of aspirin resistance in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

作者信息

Lordkipanidzé Marie, Pharand Chantal, Schampaert Erick, Turgeon Jacques, Palisaitis Donald A, Diodati Jean G

机构信息

Faculty of Pharmacy, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Eur Heart J. 2007 Jul;28(14):1702-8. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm226. Epub 2007 Jun 14.

Abstract

AIMS

We sought to compare the results obtained from six major platelet function tests in the assessment of the prevalence of aspirin resistance in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

201 patients with stable coronary artery disease receiving daily aspirin therapy (> or =80 mg) were recruited. Platelet aggregation was measured by: (i) light transmission aggregometry (LTA) after stimulation with 1.6 mM of arachidonic acid (AA), (ii) LTA after adenosine diphosphate (ADP) (5, 10, and 20 microM) stimulation, (iii) whole blood aggregometry, (iv) PFA-100, (v) VerifyNow Aspirin; urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B(2) concentrations were also measured. Eight patients (4%, 95% CI 0.01-0.07) were deemed resistant to aspirin by LTA and AA. The prevalence of aspirin resistance varied according to the assay used: 10.3-51.7% for LTA using ADP as the agonist, 18.0% for whole blood aggregometry, 59.5% for PFA-100, 6.7% for VerifyNow Aspirin, and finally, 22.9% by measuring urinary 11-dehydro-thromboxane B(2) concentrations. Results from these tests showed poor correlation and agreement between themselves.

CONCLUSION

Platelet function tests are not equally effective in measuring aspirin's antiplatelet effect and correlate poorly amongst themselves. The clinical usefulness of the different assays to classify correctly patients as aspirin resistant remains undetermined.

摘要

目的

我们试图比较六种主要血小板功能测试在评估稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者阿司匹林抵抗患病率方面所获得的结果。

方法与结果

招募了201名接受每日阿司匹林治疗(≥80毫克)的稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者。通过以下方法测量血小板聚集:(i)用1.6毫摩尔花生四烯酸(AA)刺激后的光透射聚集法(LTA);(ii)用二磷酸腺苷(ADP)(5、10和20微摩尔)刺激后的LTA;(iii)全血聚集法;(iv)PFA-100;(v)VerifyNow阿司匹林检测法;同时还测量了尿11-脱氢血栓素B2浓度。通过LTA和AA检测,有8名患者(4%,95%可信区间0.01-0.07)被判定为对阿司匹林抵抗。阿司匹林抵抗的患病率因所使用的检测方法而异:以ADP作为激动剂的LTA检测结果为10.3%-51.7%,全血聚集法为18.0%,PFA-100为59.5%,VerifyNow阿司匹林检测法为6.7%,最后,通过测量尿11-脱氢血栓素B2浓度得出的结果为22.9%。这些检测结果之间显示出较差的相关性和一致性。

结论

血小板功能测试在测量阿司匹林的抗血小板作用方面并非同样有效,且相互之间相关性较差。不同检测方法在正确将患者分类为阿司匹林抵抗方面的临床实用性仍未确定。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验