Safety of dual antiplatelet therapy using aspirin and low-dose Prasugrel with platelet reactivity testing in flow diverter treatment of intracranial aneurysms.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Liam M Flynn, Ezaz Mohamed, Nicholas Dobbs, Alberto Nania, Johannes Du Plessis, Peter M Keston, Jonny J Downer
{"title":"Safety of dual antiplatelet therapy using aspirin and low-dose Prasugrel with platelet reactivity testing in flow diverter treatment of intracranial aneurysms.","authors":"Liam M Flynn, Ezaz Mohamed, Nicholas Dobbs, Alberto Nania, Johannes Du Plessis, Peter M Keston, Jonny J Downer","doi":"10.1177/15910199231217142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is standard care for intracranial stenting to prevent thrombotic complications. Clopidogrel resistance has resulted in patients receiving newer P2Y12 inhibitors like Prasugrel, which may reduce thrombotic complications but could increase haemorrhagic complications. This study, utilising platelet reactivity testing, compared thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications associated with Clopidogrel or 20 mg Prasugrel loading in patients treated with flow diverters (FD) for intracranial aneurysms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data from 225 consecutive FD procedures. All patients received aspirin. 147 cases received Clopidogrel and 82 received Prasugrel. All patients had VerifyNow testing before the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>P2Y12 non-responders were significantly more likely to have thrombotic complications than responders and hyper-responders (7% vs. 2%, p = 0.01). Low-dose Prasugrel resulted in a significantly lower rate of non-responders when compared with Clopidogrel (7% vs. 25%, p < 0.01). We found no statistically significant difference in rates of haemorrhage between the Clopidogrel and Prasugrel groups (2.4% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.47). There were 12 complications (≤7 days) in the Clopidogrel group versus 6 in the Prasugrel group (9% vs. 7.8%, respectively, p = 0.91) and a non-significant reduction in thrombotic complications in the Prasugrel group (5.2% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.88). No significant difference was shown in long-term complications between the groups (p = 0.33).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results support the use of platelet reactivity testing and the safety of low-dose Prasugrel for FD treatment of intracranial aneurysms.</p>","PeriodicalId":49174,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199231217142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is standard care for intracranial stenting to prevent thrombotic complications. Clopidogrel resistance has resulted in patients receiving newer P2Y12 inhibitors like Prasugrel, which may reduce thrombotic complications but could increase haemorrhagic complications. This study, utilising platelet reactivity testing, compared thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications associated with Clopidogrel or 20 mg Prasugrel loading in patients treated with flow diverters (FD) for intracranial aneurysms.

Methods: We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data from 225 consecutive FD procedures. All patients received aspirin. 147 cases received Clopidogrel and 82 received Prasugrel. All patients had VerifyNow testing before the procedure.

Results: P2Y12 non-responders were significantly more likely to have thrombotic complications than responders and hyper-responders (7% vs. 2%, p = 0.01). Low-dose Prasugrel resulted in a significantly lower rate of non-responders when compared with Clopidogrel (7% vs. 25%, p < 0.01). We found no statistically significant difference in rates of haemorrhage between the Clopidogrel and Prasugrel groups (2.4% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.47). There were 12 complications (≤7 days) in the Clopidogrel group versus 6 in the Prasugrel group (9% vs. 7.8%, respectively, p = 0.91) and a non-significant reduction in thrombotic complications in the Prasugrel group (5.2% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.88). No significant difference was shown in long-term complications between the groups (p = 0.33).

Conclusion: These results support the use of platelet reactivity testing and the safety of low-dose Prasugrel for FD treatment of intracranial aneurysms.

阿司匹林和低剂量普拉格雷双重抗血小板治疗颅内动脉瘤分流治疗的安全性及血小板反应性试验。
背景:双重抗血小板治疗(DAPT)是颅内支架植入术预防血栓并发症的标准治疗。氯吡格雷耐药导致患者接受新的P2Y12抑制剂,如普拉格雷,这可能减少血栓性并发症,但可能增加出血并发症。这项研究利用血小板反应性测试,比较了氯吡格雷或20mg普拉格雷负荷治疗颅内动脉瘤患者的血栓和出血并发症。方法:回顾性分析225例连续FD手术的前瞻性数据。所有患者均服用阿司匹林。氯吡格雷147例,普拉格雷82例。所有患者在手术前都进行了VerifyNow测试。结果:P2Y12无反应者发生血栓性并发症的可能性明显高于反应者和超反应者(7%比2%,p = 0.01)。与氯吡格雷相比,低剂量普拉格雷导致无反应率显著降低(7% vs. 25%)。结论:这些结果支持血小板反应性测试的使用和低剂量普拉格雷用于FD治疗颅内动脉瘤的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Interventional Neuroradiology
Interventional Neuroradiology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信