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 .
Anti-platelet drug resistance in the prediction of thromboembolic complications after neurointervention.
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to analyze the correlation between thromboembolic complications and antiplatelet drugs before and after neurointervention . METHODS Blood sample s and radiographic data of patients who received a neurointervention ( coil embolization , stent placement or both )  were collected prospect ively . Rapid platelet function assay-aspirin ( RPFA-ASA ) was used to calculate aspirin resistance in aspirin reaction units ( ARU ) . For clopidogrel resistance , a P2Y12 assay was used to analyze the percentage of platelet inhibition . ARU > 550 and platelet inhibition < 40 % were defined as aspirin and clopidogrel resistance , respectively . RESULTS Both aspirin and clopidogrel oral pills were administered in fifty-three patients before and after neurointerventional procedures . The mean resistance values of all patients were 484 ARU and < 39 % . Ten ( 17.0 % ) of 53 patients showed resistance to aspirin  with an average of 597 ARU , and 33 ( 62.3 % ) of 53 patients showed resistance to clopidogrel  with an average of < 26 % . Ten patients demonstrated resistance to both drugs , 5 of which suffered a thromboembolic complication after neurointervention ( mean values : 640 ARU and platelet inhibition < 23 % ) . Diabetic patients and patients with hypercholesterolemia displayed mean aspirin resistances of 513.7 and 501.8 ARU , and mean clopidogrel resistances of < 33.8 % and < 40.7 % , respectively . CONCLUSION Identifying individuals with poor platelet inhibition using st and ard regimens is of great clinical importance and may help prevent cerebral ischemic events in the future . Neurointerventional research should focus on ideal doses , timing , choices , safety , and reliable measurements of antiplatelet drug therapy , as well as confirming the clinical relevance of aggregometry in cerebrovascular patients
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 .