Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A high ratio of ADP–TRAP induced platelet aggregation is associated more strongly with increased mortality after coronary stent implantation than high conventional ADP induced aggregation alone

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clinical Research in Cardiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate whether a high relative ADP induced aggregation (r-ADP-agg) is associated with an increased mortality in patients after coronary stent implantation.

Background

Several trials were not able to improve clinical outcome by adapting platelet inhibition in patients after coronary stent implantation and high platelet reactivity (HPR). Platelet monitoring is complex and conventional definition of adenosindiphosphate (ADP) induced aggregation alone might not transfer the whole picture of adequate platelet inhibition in vivo.

Methods

In a prospective single-centre observational trial multiple electrode aggregometry was performed in whole blood of patients after stent implantation. r-ADP-agg was defined as the ADP–thrombin receptor activating peptide ratio to reflect an individual degree of P2Y12 dependent platelet inhibition with a cut-off value for HPR of ≥50 %. The primary end point was mortality.

Results

Follow-up was completed in 176 of 184 patients (96 %) with a mean follow-up time of 3.7 years. 35 (20 %) patients revealed an r-ADP-agg ≥50 %. An r-ADP-agg ≥50 % was associated with an increased mortality [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 7.006 (2.561–19.17); p = 0.0001]. In a multivariable Cox regression analysis mortality was independently associated with an r-ADP-agg ≥50 % [HR 3.324 (1.542–7.165); p = 0.0022], ACS-setting [HR 3.249 (1.322–7.989); p = 0.0102] and severely reduced LV function [HR 5.463 (2.098–14.26); p = 0.0005].

Conclusion

An r-ADP-agg ≥50 % is associated with an increased mortality in patients after coronary stent implantation. Furthermore, r-ADP-agg might represent a better tool to predict clinical outcome than the conventional ADP induced platelet aggregation alone.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lopez AD, Mathers CD, Ezzati M et al (2006) Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors, 2001: systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet 367:1747–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sofi F, Marcucci R, Gori AM et al (2010) Clopidogrel non-responsiveness and risk of cardiovascular morbidity. An updated meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost 103:841–848

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Trip MD, Cats VM, van Capelle FJ et al (1990) Platelet hyperreactivity and prognosis in survivors of myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 322:1549–1554

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Muller I, Besta F, Schulz C et al (2003) Prevalence of clopidogrel non-responders among patients with stable angina pectoris scheduled for elective coronary stent placement. Thromb Haemost 89:783–787

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zeymer U, Arntz HR, Mark B et al (2012) Efficacy and safety of a high loading dose of clopidogrel administered prehospitally to improve primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction: the randomized CIPAMI trial. Clin Res Cardiol 101:305–312

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Diehl P, Olivier C, Halscheid C et al (2010) Clopidogrel affects leukocyte dependent platelet aggregation by P2Y12 expressing leukocytes. Basic Res Cardiol 105:379–387

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Weisz G et al (2013) Platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes after coronary artery implantation of drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES): a prospective multicentre registry study. Lancet 382:614–623

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Collet JP, Cuisset T, Range G et al (2012) Bedside monitoring to adjust antiplatelet therapy for coronary stenting. N Engl J Med 367:2100–2109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gurbel PA, Erlinge D, Ohman EM et al (2012) Platelet function during extended prasugrel and clopidogrel Therapy for patients with ACS treated without revascularization: the TRILOGY ACS platelet function substudy. JAMA 308(17):1785–1794. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.17312

  10. Price MJ, Berger PB, Teirstein PS et al (2011) Standard- vs high-dose clopidogrel based on platelet function testing after percutaneous coronary intervention: the GRAVITAS randomized trial. JAMA 305:1097–1105

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Trenk D, Stone GW, Gawaz M et al (2012) A randomized trial of prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with high platelet reactivity on clopidogrel after elective percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of drug-eluting stents: results of the TRIGGER-PCI (testing platelet reactivity in patients undergoing elective stent placement on clopidogrel to guide alternative therapy with prasugrel) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 59:2159–2164

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Voisin S, Bongard V, Tidjane MA et al (2011) Are P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and % inhibition index equivalent for the expression of P2Y12 inhibition by the VerifyNow assay? Role of haematocrit and haemoglobin levels. Thromb Haemost 106:227–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gremmel T, Calatzis A, Steiner S et al (2010) Is TRAP-6 suitable as a positive control for platelet reactivity when assessing response to clopidogrel? Platelets 21:515–521

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Olivier C, Diehl P, Bode C et al (2013) Thrombin receptor antagonism in antiplatelet therapy. Cardiol Therapy 2:57–68

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Olivier CB, Diehl P, Schnabel K et al (2013) Third generation P2Y12 antagonists inhibit platelet aggregation more effectively than clopidogrel in a myocardial infarction registry. Thromb Haemost 111:266–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Diehl P, Halscheid C, Olivier C et al (2011) Discontinuation of long term clopidogrel therapy induces platelet rebound hyperaggregability between 2 and 6 weeks post cessation. Clin Res Cardiol 100:765–771

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R et al (2007) Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: a case for standardized definitions. Circulation 115:2344–2351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chesebro JH, Knatterud G, Roberts R et al (1987) Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) trial, phase I: a comparison between intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and intravenous streptokinase. Clinical findings through hospital discharge. Circulation 76:142–154

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Peduzzi P, Concato J, Feinstein AR et al (1995) Importance of events per independent variable in proportional hazards regression analysis. II. Accuracy and precision of regression estimates. J Clin Epidemiol 48:1503–1510

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kwok CS, Jeevanantham V, Dawn B et al (2013) No consistent evidence of differential cardiovascular risk amongst proton-pump inhibitors when used with clopidogrel: meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol 167:965–974

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Geisler T, Langer H, Wydymus M et al (2006) Low response to clopidogrel is associated with cardiovascular outcome after coronary stent implantation. Eur Heart J 27:2420–2425

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Badr Eslam R, Lang IM, Koppensteiner R et al (2012) Residual platelet activation through protease-activated receptors (PAR)-1 and -4 in patients on P2Y12 inhibitors. Int J Cardiol 168(1):403–406. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.103

  23. Steg PG, Fox KA, Eagle KA et al (2009) Mortality following placement of drug-eluting and bare-metal stents for ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the global registry of acute coronary events. Eur Heart J 30:321–329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Aradi D, Tornyos A, Pinter T et al (2014) Optimizing P2Y12 receptor inhibition in patients with acute coronary syndrome on the basis of platelet function testing: impact of prasugrel and high-dose clopidogrel. J Am Coll Cardiol 63:1061–1070

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Seivani Y, Abdel-Wahab M, Geist V et al (2013) Long-term safety and efficacy of dual therapy with oral anticoagulation and clopidogrel in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with drug-eluting stents. Clin Res Cardiol 102:799–806

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Liosis S, Bauer T, Schiele R et al (2013) Predictors of 1-year mortality in patients with contemporary guideline-adherent therapy after acute myocardial infarction: results from the OMEGA study. Clin Res Cardiol 102:671–677

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Theidel U, Asseburg C, Giannitsis E et al (2013) Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in adult patients with acute coronary syndrome in Germany. Clin Res Cardiol 102:447–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stark R, Kirchberger I, Hunger M et al (2014) Improving care of post-infarct patients: effects of disease management programmes and care according to international guidelines. Clin Res Cardiol 103:237–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zusman O, Amit G, Gilutz H et al (2012) The significance of new onset atrial fibrillation complicating acute myocardial infarction. Clin Res Cardiol 101:17–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gremmel T, Steiner S, Seidinger D et al (2009) Comparison of methods to evaluate clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition after percutaneous intervention with stent implantation. Thromb Haemost 101:333–339

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a Grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (OL 371/1-1 to Christoph B. Olivier).

Conflict of interest

C. Bode received speaker’s fees from Merck, Astra Zeneca, and Sanofi. M. Moser received speaker’s fees from Sanofi, Astra Zeneca, Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiology and Angiology I, Heart Center Freiburg University, Hugstetter Str. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany

    Christoph B. Olivier, Katharina Schnabel, Christoph Brandt, Patrick Weik, Qian Zhou, Christoph Bode, Philipp Diehl & Martin Moser

  2. Department of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Institute of Medical Biometry and Medical Informatics, Medical Center Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany

    Manfred Olschewski

Authors
  1. Christoph B. Olivier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katharina Schnabel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christoph Brandt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Patrick Weik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Manfred Olschewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Qian Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christoph Bode
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Philipp Diehl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Martin Moser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph B. Olivier.

Additional information

P. Diehl and M. Moser shared last authorship.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 66 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Olivier, C.B., Schnabel, K., Brandt, C. et al. A high ratio of ADP–TRAP induced platelet aggregation is associated more strongly with increased mortality after coronary stent implantation than high conventional ADP induced aggregation alone. Clin Res Cardiol 103, 968–975 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-014-0737-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-014-0737-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation