No abstract

Dabigatran and rivaroxaban are novel, vitamin K-independent oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and act via antagonism of the coagulation factor (F) IIa (dabigatran) or FXa (rivaroxaban), respectively. Compared to vitamin-K-antagonists, NOACs have shown non-inferiority of risk and benefit in patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). In clinical practice there is increasing use of NOACs combined with platelet inhibitors in patients with AF and coronary artery disease. However, whether NOACs affect the function of platelet inhibitors remains incompletely known. This observational study aimed to assess the platelet function in patients receiving dabigatran or rivaroxaban and concomitant platelet inhibitors. A single centre observational study was performed analysing the platelet aggregation of patients treated with dabigatran or rivaroxaban with or without concomitant platelet inhibitors. Measurements before the initiation of NOAC therapy served as the respective control group. Platelet aggregation was measured by multiple electrode aggregometry and was induced with adenosine diphosphate (ADP, 6.5 µM) and arachidonic acid (AA, 0.5 mM), respectively. In order to evaluate whether NOACs interact with platelet inhibition by ASA or the P2Y12-antagonist clopidogrel, 87 patients were grouped according to their concomitant antiplatelet medication. Comparing the ADP- and AA-induced platelet aggregation in patients without concomitant platelet inhibitors (n = 45) no significant differences under therapy with dabigatran (d) or rivaroxaban (r) compared to the control group (c) were observed. In patients taking clopidogrel as a concomitant platelet inhibitor (n = 21), neither dabigatran nor rivaroxaban affected the ADP-induced platelet aggregation (c 20 ± 11, d 21 ± 14, r 18 ± 8 AU*min, p = 0.200). Patients receiving dabigatran or rivaroxaban in combination with ASA (n = 42; 21 ASA only, 21 ASA + clopidogrel) showed no significant differences of the AA-induced aggregation compared to the control group (c 10 ± 8, d 9 ± 7, r 10 ± 8 AU*min, p = 0.810). The antiplatelet effects of ASA and clopidogrel monitored by AA- or ADP-induced platelet aggregation were not affected by NOAC therapy.

The current standard of antiplatelet therapy of patients after myocardial infarction includes the P2Y12 receptor antagonists clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor. This study aimed to compare the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients after myocardial infarction. In a single-centre registry the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor was investigated by aggregometry in patients after myocardial infarction. To assess the overall capacity of platelet aggregation whole blood was induced with thrombin receptor activating peptide (TRAP; 32 µM). To specifically quantify the effect of P2Y12 antagonists, whole blood was stimulated with 6.4 µM adenosine diphophosphate (ADP). Relative ADP induced aggregation (r-ADP-agg) was defined as the ADP-TRAP ratio to reflect an individual degree of P2Y12-dependent platelet inhibition.Platelet function of 238 patients was analysed [clopidogrel (n=58), prasugrel (n=65), ticagrelor (n=115)]. The r-ADP-agg was 35 ± 14% for patients receiving clopidogrel, 28 ± 10% for patients receiving prasugrel and 26 ± 11% for patients receiving ticagrelor. The r-ADP-agg was significantly lower in patients treated with prasugrel (p=0.0024) or ticagrelor (p<0.0001) compared to clopidogrel. There was no significant difference between patients receiving prasugrel or ticagrelor (p=0.2559). In conclusion, prasugrel and ticagrelor provide a stronger platelet inhibition compared to clopidogrel in patients after myocardial infarction. No significant difference in platelet inhibition was detected between prasugrel and ticagrelor. (registry for patients after Myocardial Infarction Treated with AntiPlatelet agents; DRKS00003146).

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.

High platelet reactivity (HPR) after P2Y12-inhibition in patients undergoing coronary stenting is associated with an increased risk for thromboembolic events and coronary death. So far it is not known how HPR affects the clinical outcome of different treatment strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing coronary stenting. In this single centre, observational study the antiplatelet effect of P2Y12-inhibitors in AF patients undergoing coronary stenting was investigated using impedance aggregometry. Patients received either dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or triple therapy (TT). HPR was defined as the ratio of ADP-to TRAP-induced aggregation (r-ADP-agg) ≥50 %. Thromboembolic and bleeding events were assessed within the first 30 days after stenting. Out of 910 screened patients 167 patients were available for the present analysis. HPR was found in 5 of 43 (12 %) patients treated with DAPT and in 18 of 124 (15 %) patients treated with TT. In patients receiving TT, HPR was not a risk factor for thromboembolic events compared to patients with adequate response to P2Y12-inhibitors (6 vs. 8 %, p = 0.712). There was a trend for less bleeding events in patients with HPR compared to r-ADP-agg <50 % in the TT group (0 vs. 16 %, p = 0.077). Our data suggest that HPR after P2Y12-antagonism in patients receiving TT due to AF and coronary stenting might protect from bleeding without increasing thromboembolic risk. Future studies will need to investigate if patients with AF receiving coronary stenting benefit from a reduction of antithrombotic therapy.