Laboratory monitoring of P2Y12 inhibitors: communication from the SSC of the ISTH

Hemostasis Testing in the Emergency Department: A Narrative Review

Routine laboratory screening is typically performed at initial evaluation of the vast majority of presentations to the emergency department (ED). These laboratory results are crucial to the diagnostic process, as they may influence up to 70% of clinical decisions. However, despite the usefulness of biological assessments, many tests performed are inappropriate or of doubtful clinical relevance. This overutilization rate of laboratory testing in hospitals, which represents a significant medical-economic burden, ranges from 20 to 67%, with coagulation tests at the top of the list. While reviews frequently focus on nonintensive care units, there are few published assessments of emergency-specific interventions or guidelines/guidance to date. The aim of this review is to highlight current recommendations for hemostasis evaluation in the emergency setting with a specific analysis of common situations leading to ED admissions, such as suspected venous thrombosis or severe bleeding. We revisit the evidence related to the assessment of patient's hemostatic capacity based on comprehensive history taking and physical examination as well as best practice recommendations for blood sample collection to ensure the reliability of results. This review also includes an examination of various currently available point of care tests and a comprehensive discussion on indications, limitations, and interpretation of these tests.

Discordance in tests used to detect inhibition of the P2Y12 receptor in patients undergoing interventional neuroradiology procedures

BACKGROUND

Clopidogrel is an inhibitor of the P2Y12 platelet receptor but testing to demonstrate a drug effect is controversial since there are often discordant results between different tests methods.

METHODS

Samples from patients taking clopidogrel prior to intracranial flow-diversion procedures were tested using light transmission aggregometry (LTA), whole blood impedance aggregometry (WBIA) and the VerifyNow device (VND). Samples were classified as concordant if all test results were either responsive (inhibition) or resistant. Discordant results were separated using the VND into those with a responsive versus a resistant test result.

RESULTS

Samples from 96 patients were studied. Concordance for all three tests was seen in 53/96 (55%) of samples, of which 41 (43%) were responsive and 12 (12%) were resistant. Discordance was observed in 43 samples (45%), 37 (28%) of which were caused by responsive VND and either a resistant WBIA or LTA and 6 (7%) of which were caused by a resistant VND but a responsive test result using either WBIA or LTA. These two discordant groups differed in both platelet count and hematocrit, but no such difference was present between the two concordant groups.

CONCLUSION

Discordance in P2Y12 inhibition testing may be partly explained by sample platelet count and hematocrit.

High-on-treatment platelet reactivity predicts adverse outcome after carotid artery stenting: A prospective study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

High-on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR) has been established as a predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), but no data are available on its predictive value in patients on DAPT after carotid artery stenting (CAS). We aimed to evaluate the possible association between HTPR in patients on aspirin plus clopidogrel therapy after CAS and subsequent MACE.

METHODS

All consecutive patients treated with CAS in a single institution were enrolled in a prospective clinical study. HTPR was evaluated with 5 different laboratory assays carried out just before CAS. MACE incidence (cerebral ischemia, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, acute limb ischemia and vascular death) was evaluated at 30 days and thereafter at yearly visits.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients were enrolled in the study, and eight were then excluded because blood samples resulted unsuitable for the laboratory testing or CAS aborted for technical problems. Median follow-up was 5.8 years and during this period 47 MACE occurred. HTPR detected by multiplate electronic aggregometry (MEA) and the VASP phosphorylation assay (VASP) were associated with a significantly enhanced risk of MACE (p = 0.048 and p = 0.038, respectively). However, HTPR to three tests (HTPR3) was more strongly predictive of increased risk of a vascular event at follow up (p = 0.005) at bivariate analysis and also at Cox regression multivariate analysis (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

HTPR to three different assays (mainly to VASP + PFA P2Y+ VerifyNow) in patients on DAPT after CAS has predictive value for subsequent MACE. Prospective studies to assess whether platelet function testing-guided antiplatelet therapy is superior to standard DAPT in patient undergoing CAS should be considered.

Implementation of the new EUR IVD regulation and relation with ISO15189 accreditation: Guidance is urgently required for haemostasis testing

On May 26th 2017 the European Parliament and the Council of The European Union adopted the new regulation on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDR)-Regulation EU 2017/746-planned to be applied from May 26th 2022 in substitution to the previous IVD directives (IVDD 98/79 EC). After several health and legal causes due to medical device malfunctions, the European Union (EU) extensively reviewed the previous regulatory, which had remained unchanged since 1998. Aim of the work is to analyse the effects of the new IVDR on the field of haemostasis and thrombosis testing with particular attention to specific clinical conditions. Clinical laboratories will mainly deal with three different situations: (1) Diagnostic test performed with IVDR products used according with clinical indication certified by manufacturers. (2) Diagnostic test performed with certified IVDR products without clinical validation. (3) Diagnostic test performed with reagents classified as Research Use Only (RUO). At present, only few clinical laboratories through different European countries have been prepared to the new IVDR, while many laboratories are not yet aware about crucial aspects of the new process that deeply involves laboratory medicine. In conclusion, each laboratory should be aware of the IVDR certification of the reagents/instruments used in its laboratory. There are several urgent needs regarding IVDR certification: studies about the clinical performance of haemostasis tests, guidelines for LDTs (definition and documentation), internal and external quality controls for the tests recommended/suggested in the guidance/guidelines and finally implementation and/or update of clinical and laboratory guidelines.

Consensus recommendations on flow cytometry for the assessment of inherited and acquired disorders of platelet number and function: Communication from the ISTH SSC Subcommittee on Platelet Physiology

Flow cytometry is increasingly used in the study of platelets in inherited and acquired disorders of platelet number and function. However, wide variation exists in specific reagents, methods, and equipment used, making interpretation and comparison of results difficult. The goal of the present study was to provide expert consensus guidance on the use of flow cytometry for the evaluation of platelet disorders. A modified RAND/UCLA survey method was used to obtain a consensus among 11 experts from 10 countries across four continents, on the appropriateness of statements relating to clinical utility, pre-analytical variables, instrument and reagent standardization, methods, reporting, and quality control for platelet flow cytometry. Feedback from the initial survey revealed that uncertainty was sometimes due to lack of expertise with a particular test condition rather than unavailable or ambiguous data. To address this, the RAND method was modified to allow experts to self-identify statements for which they could not provide expert input. There was uniform agreement among experts in the areas of instrument and reagent standardization, methods, reporting, and quality control and this agreement is used to suggest best practices in these areas. However, 25.9% and 50% of statements related to pre-analytical variables and clinical utility, respectively, were rated as uncertain. Thus, while citrate is the preferred anticoagulant for many flow cytometric platelet tests, expert opinions differed on the acceptability of other anticoagulants, particularly heparin. Lack of expert consensus on the clinical utility of many flow cytometric platelet tests indicates the need for rigorous multicenter clinical outcome studies.

Pharmacodynamic Comparison of Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Ticagrelor and Aspirin in Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The TEMPLATE (Ticagrelor Monotherapy and Platelet Reactivity) Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

To assess differences in platelet inhibition during ticagrelor monotherapy (TIC) or dual therapy with ticagrelor and aspirin (TIC+ASP) in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention using a comprehensive panel of functional tests.

Methods and Results

In a single‐center parallel group, open label, randomized controlled trial, 110 participants were randomized to receive either TIC (n=55) or TIC+ASP (n=55) for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the platelet aggregation response with 10 μmol/L thrombin receptor activation peptide‐6 (TRAP‐6). The secondary outcomes were platelet aggregation responses and binding of surface activation markers with a panel of other activators. The mean percentage aggregation for 10 μmol/L TRAP‐6 was similar for the TIC and TIC+ASP groups (mean difference+4.29; 95% CI, −0.87 to +9.46). Aggregation was higher in the TIC group compared with the TIC+ASP group with 1 μg/mL (+6.47; +2.04 to +10.90) and 0.5 μg/mL (+14.00; +7.63 to +20.39) collagen related peptide. Aggregation responses with 5 μmol/L TRAP‐6, 5 μmol/L or 2.5 μmol/L thromboxane A₂ receptor agonist and surface activation marker binding with 5 μmol/L TRAP‐6 or 0.5 μg/mL collagen related peptide were the same between the treatment groups.

Conclusions

Patients with PCI show similar levels of inhibition of most platelet activation pathways with TIC compared with dual therapy with TIC + ASP. However, the greater aggregation response with collagen related peptide during TIC indicates incomplete inhibition of glycoprotein VI (collagen) receptor‐mediated platelet activation. This difference in pharmacodynamic response to anti‐platelet medication may contribute to the lower bleeding rates observed with TIC compared with dual antiplatelet therapy in recent clinical trials.

Registration Information

URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique Identifier ISRCTN84335288.

Advances in Platelet Function Testing-Light Transmission Aggregometry and Beyond

Platelet function testing is essential for the diagnosis of hemostasis disorders. While there are many methods used to test platelet function for research purposes, standardization is often lacking, limiting their use in clinical practice. Light transmission aggregometry has been the gold standard for over 60 years, with inherent challenges of working with live dynamic cells in specialized laboratories with independent protocols. In recent years, standardization efforts have brought forward fully automated systems that could lead to more widespread use. Additionally, new technical approaches appear promising for the future of specialized hematology laboratories. This review presents developments in platelet function testing for clinical applications.

A 70-Year-Old Female with Unexpected Platelet Function Testing Results

A 70-year-old female with a history of hypertension and left A2 segment aneurysm was scheduled for pipeline embolization device (PED) placement. Preinterventional antiplatelet prophylaxis included aspirin and ticagrelor. Unexpectedly, after 13 days of treatment, VerifyNow showed a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) value of 216, approximately >5 times the mean PRU of other patients on aspirin and ticagrelor. We confirmed platelet reactivity and ticagrelor resistance with light transmission aggregometry. Antiplatelet therapy was switched to prasugrel, and aspirin was continued. Eight days later, the P2Y12 reaction value (PRU) was 164. PED was placed without complications. Unlike clopidogrel, ticagrelor is a direct P2Y12 inhibitor that does not require metabolism to an active metabolite. Ticagrelor resistance is very rarely reported. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no case of ticagrelor resistance reported in the context of pre-PED placement prophylaxis.

Reduction of Preoperative Waiting Time before Urgent Surgery for Patients on P2Y12 Inhibitors Using Multiple Electrode Aggregometry: A Retrospective Study

P2Y₁₂ inhibitor discontinuation is essential before most surgical interventions to limit bleeding complications. Based on pharmacodynamic data, fixed discontinuation durations have been recommended. However, as platelet function recovery is highly variable among patients, a more individualized approach based on platelet function testing (PFT) has been proposed. The aim of this retrospective single-centre study was to determine whether PFT using whole blood adenosine diphosphate–multiple electrode aggregometry (ADP–MEA) was associated with a safe reduction of preoperative waiting time. Preoperative ADP–MEA was performed for 29 patients on P2Y₁₂ inhibitors. Among those, 17 patients underwent a coronary artery bypass graft. Twenty one were operated with an ADP–MEA ≥ 19 U (quantification of the area under the aggregation curve), and the waiting time was shorter by 1.6 days (median 1.8 days, IQR 0.5–2.9), by comparison with the current recommendations (five days for clopidogrel and ticagrelor, seven days for prasugrel). Platelet function recovery was indeed highly variable among individuals. With the 19 U threshold, high residual platelet inhibition was associated with perioperative platelet transfusion. These results suggest that preoperative PFT with ADP–MEA could help reduce waiting time before urgent surgery for patients on P2Y₁₂ inhibitors.

Acquired platelet function disorders

The possibility of an acquired platelet function disorder should be considered in patients who present with recent onset muco-cutaneous bleeding. Despite the availability of newer and faster platelet function assays, light transmission aggregometry (LTA) remains the preferred diagnostic test. This review examines and discusses the causes of acquired platelet dysfunction; most commonly drugs, dietary factors, medical disorders and procedures. In addition to well-known antiplatelet therapies, clinicians should be alert for newer drugs which can affect platelets, such as ibrutinib. There is little clinical trial evidence to guide the management of acquired platelet function defects, but we summarise commonly employed strategies, which include addressing the underlying cause, antifibrinolytic agents, desmopressin infusions, and in selected patients, platelet transfusions.