Why the study?
What is the frequency of aspirin non-responsiveness measured by PFA-100 versus serum TXB2 in a Turkish population taking aspirin?
What is the frequency of aspirin non-responsiveness measured by PFA-100 versus serum TXB2 in a Turkish population taking aspirin?
PFA-100 overestimates aspirin non-responsiveness compared to serum TXB2 levels, suggesting PFA-100 results require biochemical confirmation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PFA-100 may overestimate non-responsiveness versus TXB2; leaves open whether biochemical confirmation refines risk assessment in observational cohorts.
Aim: Recurrent thromboembolic vascular events have been reported in 5.5 to 60% of the population despite aspirin therapy. We aimed to determine the frequency of aspirin non- responsiveness in our population with Platelet Function Analyzer-100 Closure Time (PFA- 100 CT) and serum tromboxane B 2 , soluble CD40 Ligand and soluble P-selectin levels. Material and Methods: Patients (n=118) taking 80-300 mg/day aspirin were enrolled into the study. PFA-100 of 66 healthy people was used to predict cut-off value in our population. PFA-100 test results and serum TXB 2 , sCD40L and sP-selectine levels of the patients were compared with each other. A TXB 2 level of ≥80 ng/ml was accepted as an indicator of aspirin non-responsiveness. Results: According to PFA-100, 40% of the patients revealed aspirin non-responsiveness which was found 8% with serum TXB2 levels. Patients with aspirin non-responsiveness ac- cording to the PFA-100 showed significantly higher serum TBX2, sCD40L and sP-selectin (p<0.001, p,=0.018, p=0.037 respectively). Conclusions: PFA-100 results showed higher frequency of aspirin non-responsiveness in our population, however biochemical tests of the platelet function indicated the possibility of lower ratios. Therefore the prevelance of aspirin non-responsiveness may not be so frequent in our population as established before and PFA-100 test results need confirmation with the serum TXB2 level.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saka et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: