Key result
Compared to light transmission aggregation, PFA-100 and VerifyNow assays showed sensitivities of 62.1% and 39.3% and specificities of 80.2% and 96.4% for detecting residual platelet reactivity.
Why the study?
Do point-of-care methods (PFA-100 and VerifyNow) accurately detect residual platelet reactivity compared to light transmission aggregation in CAD patients undergoing PCI on dual antiplatelet therapy?
Observational (n=484)
Do point-of-care methods (PFA-100 and VerifyNow) accurately detect residual platelet reactivity compared to light transmission aggregation in CAD patients undergoing PCI on dual antiplatelet therapy?
p-value: p=<.0001
Point-of-care assays (PFA-100 and VerifyNow) correlate significantly with light transmission aggregation for detecting residual platelet reactivity in PCI patients, but exhibit varying sensitivity and specificity.
PFA-100 and VerifyNow warrant cautious interpretation for residual reactivity; leaves open their role versus light transmission aggregation.
Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) receiving aspirin therapy with a residual platelet reactivity (RPR) may be at increased risk of ischemic vascular events. Point-of-care (POC) methods PFA-100 (Dade-Behring, Marburg, Germany) and VerifyNow (Accumetrics, San Diego, CA) assays have been suggested as rapid tools to evaluate RPR. We compared PFA-100 closure times by collagen/epinephrine and VerifyNow Aspirin assays with light transmission aggregation (LTA) induced by 1 mmol/L of arachidonic acid in 484 patients with CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. RPR was detected in 30.0% of patients by LTA, in 32.4% by PFA-100, and in 14.3% by VerifyNow. Significant correlations were found among 3 methods (all P < .0001). In relation to the presence or absence of RPR by LTA and PFA-100, by LTA and VerifyNow, and by PFA-100 and VerifyNow, samples were significantly concordant (all P < .0001). Assuming LTA as the reference method, PFA-100 and VerifyNow showed sensitivity of 62.1% and 39.3% and specificity of 80.2% and 96.4%, respectively. The cutoff values for POC methods need to be defined for clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paniccia et al. (2007) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease (n=484). PFA-100 and VerifyNow assays vs. Light transmission aggregation (LTA) was evaluated on Detection of residual platelet reactivity (RPR) (p=<.0001). Compared to light transmission aggregation, PFA-100 and VerifyNow assays showed sensitivities of 62.1% and 39.3% and specificities of 80.2% and 96.4% for detecting residual platelet reactivity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: