Background
Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and previous ischemic cerebrovascular events (ICVE, ischemic stroke, or transitory ischemic attack) constitute a high‐risk subgroup for cardiovascular outcomes. High‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C) levels are correlated with cardiovascular events. Lipid transfer to HDL affects structure size and HDL subclass profile. Impairment of this transfer could influence ischemic risk seen in patients with CAD + ICVE. The objective was to evaluate the HDL ability to receive the lipids in patients with CAD with or without ICVE.
Methods
Patients with CAD + ICVE (n = 60) and patients with CAD only (n = 60) were matched by age, sex, acute coronary syndromes (ACS) event type, and time elapsed between the ACS event and inclusion in the study. Lipid transfer to HDL was evaluated by incubating donor lipid nanoparticles labeled with radioactive unesterified cholesterol (UC) and esterified cholesterol (EC), phospholipid (PL), and triglyceride (TG) with whole plasma. After the chemical precipitation of non‐HDL fractions and nanoparticles, the supernatant was counted for HDL radioactivity.
Results
CAD + ICVE group presented with impaired lipid transfer to HDL for PL (CAD + ICVE: 21.14 ± 2.7% vs CAD: 21.67 ± 3.1%, P = .03), TG (CAD + ICVE: 4.88 ± 0.97% vs CAD: 5.63 ± 0.92%, P = .002), and UC (CAD + ICVE: 5.55 ± 1.19% vs CAD: 6.16 ± 1.14%, P = .009). Lipid transfer to HDL was similar in both groups for EC. Adjusted models showed similar results.
Conclusion
Patients with CAD and ICVE have reduced lipid transfer to HDL compared to those with CAD only. Dysfunctional HDL may account for the higher incidence of ischemic outcomes observed in this population.
Introduction: The interaction between anticoagulants and platelet function is complex. Previous publications showed mixed results regarding the role of heparins in platelet aggregation. On the other hand, the direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI) dabigatran might enhance the risk of myocardial infarction in patients with atrial fibrillation, which could be related to increased platelet aggregability. Methods: This was a prospective, interventional study of patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) taking low-dose aspirin. The objective of the current study was to compare the effects of dabigatran versus enoxaparin on platelet aggregability. Subjects initially were on orally administered dabigatran for 5 days followed by subcutaneously administered enoxaparin after a 30-day washout period. Platelet function was assessed at baseline and after each intervention by multiple electrode aggregometry (MEA-ASPI) (primary endpoint), serum thromboxane B2 (TXB2), VerifyNow Aspirin TM , and coagulation tests (secondary endpoints). Results: Compared to baseline MEA-ASPI values, dabigatran increased platelet aggregation while enoxaparin decreased platelet aggregation (? 5 U ± 24.1 vs-6 U ± 22.2, respectively, p = 0.012). The TXB2 assay showed the same pattern (? 2 pg/ml for dabigatran vs-13 pg/ml for enoxaparin, p = 0.011). None of the additional tests showed significant differences between the groups. Individually, compared to baseline TXB2 results, enoxaparin significantly decreased platelet activation [33 (16.5-95) pg/ mL vs 20 (10-52) pg/mL, respectively, p = 0.026], but no significant differences were observed with dabigatran. Conclusions: DTI and anti-Xa drugs exert opposite effects on platelet function. A significant decrease in platelet activation through COX1 (also known as prostaglandin G/H synthase 1) was observed with enoxaparin, but no significant differences in platelet function were observed with dabigatran. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02389582.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.