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 .
Protocol for a systematic review of the diagnostic and prognostic utility of tests currently available for the detection of aspirin resistance in patients with established cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease
Background The benefits of aspirin as an anti-platelet agent are well established ; however , there has been much debate about the lack of uniformity in the efficacy of aspirin to inhibit platelet function . In some patients , aspirin fails to inhibit platelets even where compliance has been verified , a phenomenon which has been termed “ aspirin resistance ” . These patients may in turn be at a higher risk of future vascular events . The proportion of “ resistant ” patients identified depends on the type of platelet function test . Therefore , the aim of this systematic review is to determine which , if any , platelet function test has utility in terms of identifying patients with a high risk of vascular events . The review has been registered with PROSPERO ( CRD42012002151 ) . Methods Relevant studies will be sought from bibliographic data bases . Trials registers will be search ed for ongoing studies . Reference lists will be checked and subject experts contacted . There will be no date or language restrictions . St and ard review ing methodology to minimise bias will be employed . Any prospect i ve studies in patients on aspirin therapy and assessing platelet function in relation to relevant clinical outcomes will be included , as will studies reporting prognostic models . Risk of bias assessment will be based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies guidelines , and suitable criteria for assessing quality of prognostic studies . Data on test accuracy measures , relative risks , odds or hazard ratios will be extracted and meta-analysed , where possible , using a r and om-effects model to account for between- study heterogeneity . Where appropriate , the causes of heterogeneity will be explored through meta-regression and sub-group or sensitivity analyses . If platelet function testing is demonstrated to have diagnostic/predictive utility in a specific population , the potential for a cost-effectiveness analysis will be considered and , if possible , an economic model constructed . This will be supported by a systematic review of existing economic evaluation studies . Discussion The results of the review could indicate if platelet function test(s ) could lead to a reliable prediction of the risk of clinical ly important events in a defined population , and thus support investigations into adjustments to therapy in order to compensate for a predicted poor response to st and ard aspirin
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 .