Department of Cardiology, Heart Center Balatonfüred and Semmelweis University, Heart and Vascular Center, 2 Gyogy Ter Balatonfüred, Budapest 8230, Hungary
Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Eur Heart J. 2015 Jul 14;36(27):1762-71. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv104. Epub 2015 Apr 20.
Although platelet reactivity during P2Y12-inhibitors is associated with stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding, standardized and clinically validated thresholds for accurate risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are lacking. We sought to determine the prognostic value of low platelet reactivity (LPR), optimal platelet reactivity (OPR), or high platelet reactivity (HPR) by applying uniform cut-off values for standardized devices.
Authors of studies published before January 2015, reporting associations between platelet reactivity, ST, and major bleeding were contacted for a collaborative analysis using consensus-defined, uniform cut-offs for standardized platelet function assays. Based on best available evidence for each device (exploratory studies), LPR-OPR-HPR categories were defined as <95, 95-208, and >208 PRU for VerifyNow, <19, 19-46, and >46 U for the Multiplate analyser and <16, 16-50, and >50% for VASP assay. Seventeen studies including 20 839 patients were used for the analysis; 97% were treated with clopidogrel and 3% with prasugrel. Patients with HPR had significantly higher risk for ST [risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI: 2.73 (2.03-3.69), P < 0.00001], yet a slight reduction in bleeding [RR: 0.84 (0.71-0.99), P = 0.04] compared with those with OPR. In contrast, patients with LPR had a higher risk for bleeding [RR: 1.74 (1.47-2.06), P < 0.00001], without any further benefit in ST [RR: 1.06 (0.68-1.65), P = 0.78] in contrast to OPR. Mortality was significantly higher in patients with HPR compared with other categories (P < 0.05). Validation cohorts (n = 14) confirmed all results of exploratory studies (n = 3).
Platelet reactivity assessment during thienopyridine-type P2Y12-inhibitors identifies PCI-treated patients at higher risk for mortality and ST (HPR) or at an elevated risk for bleeding (LPR).
尽管血小板反应性与支架血栓形成(ST)和出血有关,但缺乏经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后进行准确风险分层的标准化和经过临床验证的阈值。我们旨在通过应用标准化设备的统一截止值来确定低血小板反应性(LPR)、最佳血小板反应性(OPR)或高血小板反应性(HPR)的预后价值。
作者联系了 2015 年 1 月之前发表的研究的作者,以进行合作分析,使用共识定义的、标准化血小板功能检测的统一截止值。基于每个设备的最佳可用证据(探索性研究),将 LPR-OPR-HPR 类别定义为 VerifyNow 的 <95、95-208 和 >208 PRU、Multiplate 分析仪的 <19、19-46 和 >46 U 以及 VASP 检测的 <16、16-50 和 >50%。使用 17 项包括 20839 名患者的研究进行分析;97%的患者接受氯吡格雷治疗,3%的患者接受普拉格雷治疗。HPR 患者的 ST 风险显著增加[风险比(RR)和 95%置信区间:2.73(2.03-3.69),P < 0.00001],但出血风险略有降低[RR:0.84(0.71-0.99),P = 0.04],与 OPR 患者相比。相比之下,LPR 患者出血风险较高[RR:1.74(1.47-2.06),P < 0.00001],而 ST 无进一步获益[RR:1.06(0.68-1.65),P = 0.78],与 OPR 患者相比。与其他类别相比,HPR 患者的死亡率显著更高(P < 0.05)。验证队列(n = 14)证实了探索性研究(n = 3)的所有结果。
噻吩吡啶类 P2Y12 抑制剂治疗期间的血小板反应性评估可识别出发生 ST(HPR)或出血风险增加(LPR)的 PCI 治疗患者的死亡风险和 ST 风险更高。