Why the study?
Does a new relative definition of aspirin non-responsiveness by PFA-100 alter the prevalence and identify predictors compared to an absolute cut-off in patients with stable CAD or diabetes?
Does a new relative definition of aspirin non-responsiveness by PFA-100 alter the prevalence and identify predictors compared to an absolute cut-off in patients with stable CAD or diabetes?
Defining aspirin non-responsiveness using an absolute cut-off may overestimate its prevalence compared to a relative increase from baseline, with diabetes being a significant independent predictor of non-responsiveness.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Relative definitions may curb overestimation of aspirin non-responsiveness; leaves open diabetes as predictor pending prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Aspirin non-responsiveness has been described as having a normal closure time (CT) by platelet function analyzer (PFA)-100 assay despite confirmed treatment with aspirin. There is no standard definition of aspirin non-responsiveness by PFA-100, with a variety of cut-off values having been used. We proposed an alternative definition of aspirin non-responsiveness by PFA-100 assay. METHODS: One hundred eighty-four patients with diagnosis of stable coronary artery disease or diabetes mellitus were included in the study. Blood samples were drawn before and after the 7 days of aspirin therapy. An individual was labelled as aspirin non-responder if his/her post-aspirin CT was not 2SD above his/her baseline CT, where SD was calculated from the baseline CTs of the study population. Aspirin non-responsiveness was also defined as having a normal post-aspirin CT (< or =193 s) regardless of pre-aspirin CT. RESULTS: The baseline CT ranged 82-187 s (mean 129.1 +/- 27.5, median 128 s) in the study population. At the end of 1 week of aspirin administration, CT increased to a mean of 260.7 +/- 63.6 s (range 102-301). According to our definition, 28 (15.2%) of 184 patients were aspirin non-responders. Univariate analysis indicated that aspirin non-responsiveness was closely associated with gender (P = 0.012) diabetes (P = 0.006), smoking (P = 0.0496) and hypertension (P = 0.021). Multivariate analysis identified diabetes (P = 0.016) as the only significant independent predictor for the presence of aspirin non-responsiveness. Thirty-four of 184 patients (18.5%) classified as aspirin non-responders according to the second criteria. Seven patients with prolongation of post-aspirin CT more than 2SD were classified as aspirin non-responders by the second criteria. Only 1 patient without prolongation of CT more than 2SD was classified as aspirin responsive by the second criteria. CONCLUSION: Definition of aspirin non-responsiveness as post-aspirin CTs < or =193 s might overestimate the prevalence of aspirin non-responsiveness. Nevertheless, definition of aspirin non-responsiveness by PFA-100 must be standardized and its utility as a predictor of cardiovascular events needs to be further investigated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abacı et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: