Why the study?
Does high on-treatment platelet reactivity predict target lesion revascularization in patients with peripheral artery disease after percutaneous endovascular procedures?
Does high on-treatment platelet reactivity predict target lesion revascularization in patients with peripheral artery disease after percutaneous endovascular procedures?
High on-treatment platelet reactivity does not predict target lesion revascularization or mortality at one year in patients with peripheral artery disease undergoing endovascular procedures.
HPR does not predict TLR after endovascular procedures in PAD; leaves open its prognostic value in larger prospective cohorts.
BACKGROUND: High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) predicts adverse cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. The impact of HPR in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) after peripheral endovascular procedures is unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 385 patients with PAD and successful percutaneous endovascular procedure were included. Patients received aspirin as a long-term treatment in addition to the P2Y12 receptor antagonist clopidogrel, as recommended after such a procedure for at least 1 month. Platelet function was assessed on a Multiplate analyzer. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at one year. Restenosis (≥ 75 %) in duplex sonography, mortality at one year and identification of independent predictors of TLR were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: TLR rates were similar in HPR and no-HPR patients (14.3 % vs. 12.7 %, hazard rate (HR) 0.94, 95 % CI 0.48 - 1.84, P = 0.86). Restenosis (≥ 75 %) in duplex sonography did not differ between the two study groups (15.6 % vs. 16.9 %, HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.62 - 2.12, P = 0.64). Independent predictors of TLR were intervention of restenotic lesions, total vessel occlusions and critical limb ischemia, but not HPR (adjusted HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.55 - 2.10, P = 0.84). No difference in mortality at one year was observed (1.3 % vs. 1.6 %, HR 1.28, 95 % CI 0.15 - 11.0, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PAD, HPR did not have a significant impact on outcomes within the first year after percutaneous endovascular intervention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bernlochner et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: