Results indicated that some PFTs may have some prognostic utility , i.e. a trend for more clinical events to be associated with groups classified as ' aspirin resistant ' .
Study -level effect sizes were generally small and absolute outcome risk was not substantially different between ' aspirin resistant ' and ' aspirin sensitive ' design ations .
Based on assumptions of PFTs being able to accurately identify patients at high risk of clinical events and such patients benefiting from treatment modification , the economic model found that a test-treat strategy was likely to be cost-effective .
However , neither assumption is currently evidence based .
BACKGROUND The use of aspirin is well established for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease .
However , a proportion of patients suffer repeat cardiovascular events despite being prescribed aspirin treatment .
It is uncertain whether or not this is due to an inherent inability of aspirin to sufficiently modify platelet activity .
This report aims to investigate whether or not insufficient platelet function inhibition by aspirin ( ' aspirin resistance ' ) , as defined using platelet function tests ( PFTs ) , is linked to the occurrence of adverse clinical outcomes , and further , whether or not patients at risk of future adverse clinical events can be identified through PFTs .
OBJECTIVES To review systematic ally the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence regarding the association between PFT design ation of ' aspirin resistance ' and the risk of adverse clinical outcome ( s ) in patients prescribed aspirin therapy .
To undertake exploratory model-based cost-effectiveness analysis on the use of PFTs .
Profile and prevalence of aspirin resistance in patients with cardiovascular disease.
We determined the prevalence and clinical predictors of aspirin resistance by prospect ively study ing 325 patients with stable cardiovascular disease who were receiving aspirin ( 325 mg/day for > or = 7 days ) but no other antiplatelet agents .  We also compared the detection of aspirin resistance with optical platelet aggregation , a widely accepted method , with a newer , more rapid method , the platelet function analyzer (PFA)-100 , a whole blood test that measures platelet adhesion and aggregation ex vivo . Blood sample s were analyzed in a blinded fashion for aspirin resistance by optical aggregation using adenosine diphosphate ( ADP ) and arachidonic acid , and by PFA-100 using collagen and /or epinephrine and collagen and /or ADP cartridges to measure aperture closure time . Aspirin resistance was defined as a mean aggregation of > or = 70 % with 10 microM ADP and a mean aggregation of > or = 20 % with 0.5 mg/ml arachidonic acid . Aspirin semiresponders were defined as meeting one , but not both of the above criteria . Aspirin resistance by PFA-100 was defined as having a normal collagen and /or epinephrine closure time ( < or = 193 seconds ) . By optical aggregation , 5.5 % of the patients were aspirin resistant and 23.8 % were aspirin semiresponders . By PFA-100 , 9.5 % of patients were aspirin resistant . Of the 18 patients who were aspirin resistant by aggregation , 4 were also aspirin resistant by PFA-100 . Patients who were either aspirin resistant or aspirin semiresponders were more likely to be women ( 34.4 % vs 17.3 % , p = 0.001 ) and less likely to be smokers ( 0 % vs 8.3 % , p = 0.004 ) compared with aspirin-sensitive patients . There was a trend toward increased age in patients with aspirin resistance  or aspirin semiresponders ( 65.7 vs 61.3 years , p = 0.06 ) . There were no differences in aspirin sensitivity by race , diabetes , platelet count , renal disease , or liver disease
Results indicated that some PFTs may have some prognostic utility , i.e. a trend for more clinical events to be associated with groups classified as ' aspirin resistant ' .
Study -level effect sizes were generally small and absolute outcome risk was not substantially different between ' aspirin resistant ' and ' aspirin sensitive ' design ations .
Based on assumptions of PFTs being able to accurately identify patients at high risk of clinical events and such patients benefiting from treatment modification , the economic model found that a test-treat strategy was likely to be cost-effective .
However , neither assumption is currently evidence based .
BACKGROUND The use of aspirin is well established for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease .
However , a proportion of patients suffer repeat cardiovascular events despite being prescribed aspirin treatment .
It is uncertain whether or not this is due to an inherent inability of aspirin to sufficiently modify platelet activity .
This report aims to investigate whether or not insufficient platelet function inhibition by aspirin ( ' aspirin resistance ' ) , as defined using platelet function tests ( PFTs ) , is linked to the occurrence of adverse clinical outcomes , and further , whether or not patients at risk of future adverse clinical events can be identified through PFTs .
OBJECTIVES To review systematic ally the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence regarding the association between PFT design ation of ' aspirin resistance ' and the risk of adverse clinical outcome ( s ) in patients prescribed aspirin therapy .
To undertake exploratory model-based cost-effectiveness analysis on the use of PFTs .