Platelet function testing: dead or alive

Abstract

Background High on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) to antiplatelet medication leads to ischemic events, whereas low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LTPR) increases bleeding risk. However, various trials have failed to demonstrate superiority of tailored antiplatelet regimens (ARCTIC, ANTARCTIC, Trigger-PCI, and GRAVITAS). TROPICAL-ACS was the first study that demonstrated the benefit of tailoring antiplatelet medication according to platelet function analysis. A potential reason may be that different platelet function assays were used in these trials. Objectives To evaluate whether the results of platelet function tests are comparable. Patients/Methods We tested three commonly used assays - light transmission aggregometry (LTA), (Multiplate impedance aggregometry [MP]), and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation assay (VASP) - in 23 patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. Results With LTA, HTPR occurred in 57% of patients; with VASP, it occurred in 43% of patients; and with MP, it occurred in 13% of patients. According to LTA, only 35% of patients were in the therapeutic window; according to VASP, 57% of patients were in the therapeutic window; and according to MP, 48% of patients were in the therapeutic window. With LTA, LTPR occurred in 9% of patients; with VASP, it occurred in 0% of patients; and with MP, it occurred in 39% of patients. Therefore, the prevalences of HTPR and LTPR differed significantly between assays. Remarkably, in 17% of patients, one assay showed HTPR whereas another showed LTPR. Conclusions The results of different platelet function assays differ substantially. Up to now, only TROPICAL-ACS had demonstrated a benefit of tailoring antiplatelet medication according to platelet function analysis. Future trials are needed to evaluate whether the platelet function assay used in TROPICAL-ACS is the 'correct' one and revives platelet function testing.