Why the study?
Patient characteristics affect the magnitude of platelet inhibition, and monitoring tools may improve outcomes by balancing antithrombotic efficacy and bleeding risk.
Does monitoring of antiplatelet therapy improve outcomes in patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular atherosclerosis?
Does monitoring of antiplatelet therapy improve outcomes in patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular atherosclerosis?
This review highlights the emerging role of tailored antiplatelet therapy through monitoring to optimize the balance between efficacy and bleeding risk in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.
May support tailored antiplatelet monitoring in atherosclerosis; leaves open outcome benefits pending randomized trials.
Single antiplatelet therapy represents the cornerstone of thrombosis prevention in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin plus a P2Y 12 inhibitor, is the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing both coronary and peripheral percutaneous interventions. Recent data suggest the efficacy of DAPT also after minor stroke. In this setting, a large body of evidence has documented that genetic and acquired patients' characteristics may affect the magnitude of platelet inhibition induced by antiplatelet agents. The implementation of tools allowing the identification and prediction of platelet inhibition has recently been shown to improve outcomes, leading to an optimal balance between antithrombotic efficacy and bleeding risk. We are therefore clearly moving towards tailored antiplatelet therapy. The aim of this paper is to summarize the available evidence on the evaluation of platelet inhibition in patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular atherosclerosis. We will here focus on antiplatelet therapy based on both aspirin and P2Y 12 inhibitors. In addition, we provide practical insights into the clinical settings in which it appears reasonable to implement antiplatelet therapy monitoring.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marcucci et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: