Clinical Research in Cardiology

, Volume 107, Supplement 2, pp 30–39 | Cite as

LMU Munich: platelet inhibition novel aspects on platelet inhibition and function

  • Lisa Gross
  • Dirk Sibbing
  • Christian Schulz
  • Florian Gärtner
  • Joachim Pircher
  • Steffen MassbergEmail author
  • Tobias Petzold


A core research area in the Department of Cardiology at Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) Munich focuses on antiplatelet therapy, its translational aspects, and its underlying mechanism with respect to platelet physiology. We are conducting a broad range of investigator-initiated clinical trials (phase II–IV) and preclinical studies on the topic of antithrombotic therapy for percutaneous coronary intervention patients, platelet activation, and reactivity as well as on novel inhibitors of platelet adhesion. Just recently, we completed the large multi-centre investigator-initiated TROPICAL-ACS trial on guided early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients (Sibbing et al. in Lancet 390:1747–1757, 2017; Sibbing et al. in Thromb Haemost 117:1240–1248), done at 33 sites in Europe. Furthermore, besides other ongoing clinical studies, we initiated and are currently recruiting patients for the multi-centre randomized APixaban versus PhenpRocoumon in Patients With ACS and AF: APPROACH-ACS-AF study as well as for the multi-centre phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of revacept in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease (Revacept/CAD/02) trial.


Platelet inhibition 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all the authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Sibbing D, Aradi D, Jacobshagen C et al (2017) Guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (TROPICAL-ACS): a randomised, open-label, multicentre trial. Lancet 390:1747–1757CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sibbing D, Angiolillo DJ, Huber K (2017) Antithrombotic therapy for acute coronary syndrome: past, present and future. Thromb Haemost 117:1240–1248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP et al (2016) 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 37:267–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S et al (2017) 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 39:119–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Antman EM, Wiviott SD, Murphy SA et al (2008) Early and late benefits of prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a TRITON-TIMI 38 (TRial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet InhibitioN with Prasugrel-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 51:2028–2033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Becker RC, Bassand JP, Budaj A et al (2011) Bleeding complications with the P2Y12 receptor antagonists clopidogrel and ticagrelor in the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Eur Heart J 32:2933–2944CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A et al (2009) Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 361:1045–1057CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH et al (2007) Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 357:2001–2015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zettler ME, Peterson ED, McCoy LA et al (2017) Switching of adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor after hospital discharge among myocardial infarction patients: insights from the Treatment with Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors: Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events after Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) observational study. Am Heart J 183:62–68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rollini F, Franchi F, Angiolillo DJ (2016) Switching P2Y12-receptor inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 13:11–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Velders MA, Abtan J, Angiolillo DJ et al (2016) Safety and efficacy of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart 102:617–625CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aradi D, Kirtane A, Bonello L et al (2015) Bleeding and stent thrombosis on P2Y12-inhibitors: collaborative analysis on the role of platelet reactivity for risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention. Eur Heart J 36:1762–1771CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    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 382:614–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sibbing D, Gross L, Trenk D et al (2018) Age and outcomes following guided de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the randomized TROPICAL-ACS trial. Eur Heart J. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cuisset T, Deharo P, Quilici J et al (2017) Benefit of switching dual antiplatelet therapy after acute coronary syndrome: the TOPIC (timing of platelet inhibition after acute coronary syndrome) randomized study. Eur Heart J 38:3070–3078CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Luca L, D’Ascenzo F, Musumeci G et al (2017) Incidence and outcome of switching of oral platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the SCOPE registry. EuroIntervention 13:459–466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Motovska Z, Hlinomaz O, Kala P et al (2018) 1-year outcomes of patients undergoing primary angioplasty for myocardial infarction treated with prasugrel versus ticagrelor. J Am Coll Cardiol 71:371–381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dewilde WJ, Oirbans T, Verheugt FW et al (2013) Use of clopidogrel with or without aspirin in patients taking oral anticoagulant therapy and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet 381:1107–1115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gibson CM, Mehran R, Bode C et al (2016) Prevention of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI. N Engl J Med 375:2423–2434CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cannon CP, Gropper S, Bhatt DL et al (2016) Design and rationale of the RE-DUAL PCI trial: a prospective, randomized, phase 3b study comparing the safety and efficacy of dual antithrombotic therapy with dabigatran etexilate versus warfarin triple therapy in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. Clin Cardiol 39:555–564CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lu W, Chen L, Wang Y et al (2015) Rationale and design of MANJUSRI trial: a randomized, open-label, active-controlled multicenter study to evaluate the safety of combined therapy with ticagrelor and warfarin in AF subjects after PCI-eS. Contemp Clin Trials 40:166–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D et al (2016) 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. Eur Heart J 37:2893–2962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vranckx P, Lewalter T, Valgimigli M et al (2018) Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of an edoxaban-based antithrombotic regimen in patients with atrial fibrillation following successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent placement: rationale and design of the ENTRUST-AF PCI trial. Am Heart J 196:105–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Authors/Task Force m, Windecker S, Kolh P et al (2014) 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 35:2541–2619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lip GY, Windecker S, Huber K et al (2014) Management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions: a joint consensus document of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS). Eur Heart J 35:3155–3179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Massberg S, Gawaz M, Gruner S et al (2003) A crucial role of glycoprotein VI for platelet recruitment to the injured arterial wall in vivo. J Exp Med 197:41–49CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Massberg S, Konrad I, Bultmann A et al (2004) Soluble glycoprotein VI dimer inhibits platelet adhesion and aggregation to the injured vessel wall in vivo. FASEB J 18:397–399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ungerer M, Rosport K, Bultmann A et al (2011) Novel antiplatelet drug revacept (dimeric glycoprotein VI-Fc) specifically and efficiently inhibited collagen-induced platelet aggregation without affecting general hemostasis in humans. Circulation 123:1891–1899CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yao X, Abraham NS, Sangaralingham LR et al (2016) Effectiveness and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc 5:e003725CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hohnloser SH, Basic E, Nabauer M (2017) Comparative risk of major bleeding with new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and phenprocoumon in patients with atrial fibrillation: a post-marketing surveillance study. Clin Res Cardiol 106:618–628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    De Caterina R, Lip GYH (2017) The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and extremes of body weight—a systematic literature review. Clin Res Cardiol 106:565–572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S et al (2009) Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 361:1139–1151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, Reilly PA, Wallentin L (2010) Randomized evaluation of long-term anticoagulation therapy I. Newly identified events in the RE-LY trial. N Engl J Med 363:1875–1876CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E et al (2014) Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 383:955–962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Uchino K, Hernandez AV (2012) Dabigatran association with higher risk of acute coronary events: meta-analysis of noninferiority randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 172:397–402CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Brueckmann M et al (2013) Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with mechanical heart valves. N Engl J Med 369:1206–1214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Petzold T, Thienel M, Konrad I et al (2016) Oral thrombin inhibitor aggravates platelet adhesion and aggregation during arterial thrombosis. Sci Transl Med 8:367ra168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wong CH, Jenne CN, Petri B, Chrobok NL, Kubes P (2013) Nucleation of platelets with blood-borne pathogens on Kupffer cells precedes other innate immunity and contributes to bacterial clearance. Nat Immunol 14:785–792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yeaman MR (2014) Platelets: at the nexus of antimicrobial defence. Nat Rev Microbiol 12:426–437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Engelmann B, Massberg S (2013) Thrombosis as an intravascular effector of innate immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 13:34–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gaertner F, Ahmad Z, Rosenberger G et al (2017) Migrating platelets are mechano-scavengers that collect and bundle bacteria. Cell 171:1368 e23–1382 e23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pircher J, Czermak T, Ehrlich A et al (2018) Cathelicidins prime platelets to mediate arterial thrombosis and tissue inflammation. Nat Commun 9:1523CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisa Gross
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dirk Sibbing
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christian Schulz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Florian Gärtner
    • 1
    • 2
  • Joachim Pircher
    • 1
    • 2
  • Steffen Massberg
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tobias Petzold
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of CardiologyLudwig-Maximilians-University of MunichMunichGermany
  2. 2.DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research), Munich Heart AllianceMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations