The use of the VerifyNow system to monitor antiplatelet therapy: A review of the current evidence

Department of Cardiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Platelets (Impact Factor: 2.63). 12/2008; 19(7):479-88. DOI: 10.1080/09537100802317918
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Multiple studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of dual or triple antiplatelet therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel and glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes as well as in patients undergoing coronary stent implantation. In the last few years, it is becoming clear that not all patients receive the full benefits with the current standard dosages of antiplatelet therapy. Specifically, numerous studies have revealed a wide interindividual variability in the response to these antiplatelet agents and, more importantly, both nonresponsiveness as well as a heightened residual platelet reactivity have been linked to the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events. Therefore, assays that identify those patients with an impaired responsiveness or a heightened platelet reactivity despite dual antiplatelet therapy may contribute to better risk stratification and will probably improve clinical outcome when appropriate action is initiated. Likewise, a considerable number of patients do not achieve the minimal inhibition of aggregation threshold with the current recommended weight-adjusted dosages of GP IIb/IIIa therapy. Identifying and optimizing the absolute degree of platelet inhibition in this subgroup of patients will probably improve clinical outcome. The VerifyNow platform is one of the most user friendly point-of-care platelet function test systems because it produces rapid results at the patient bedside. The purpose of the present paper is to give insight into the principal mechanisms of the VerifyNow system, to discuss its clinical utility for the monitoring of antiplatelet therapy and to discuss the proposed cut-off levels to segregate responders from non-responders for the different types of antiplatelet therapy.

Download full-text


Available from: Jurriën ten Berg, Jul 06, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bei Patienten mit Koronarstents, die operiert werden müssen, stellt sich die Frage, ob und wie die Thrombozytenaggregationshemmung fortgesetzt werden soll. Dabei gilt es, das Risiko perioperativer Blutungen gegen das einer akuten Stentthrombose abzuwägen. Das Blutungsrisiko hängt in erster Linie von der Art der geplanten Operation und von den Komorbiditäten des Patienten ab. Das Thromboserisiko ist aufgrund der thrombogenen Oberfläche der Stents erhöht. Dabei spielen die Zeitdauer, die seit der Stentimplantation vergangen ist, die Art des Stents [unbeschichtet („bare-metal stent“, BMS) oder beschichtet (z.B. „drug-eluting stent“, DES)] sowie angiographische und klinische Patientenfaktoren eine Rolle. Die perioperative antiaggregatorische Therapie muss daher bei jedem Patienten individuell angepasst werden. Ein „Bridging“ mit Heparin ist unwirksam. Die Zeit der perioperativen Unterbrechung der oralen Antiplättchentherapie kann bei Hochrisikopatienten mit i.v. Thromobozytenaggregationshemmern überbrückt werden. Ob ein bettseitiges Monitoring der Thrombozytenfunktion die perioperative Führung dieser Patienten verbessern und zur Reduktion von Komplikationen beitragen kann, ist Gegenstand aktueller Studien. In patients with coronary stents scheduled for surgery the question arises whether and how antiplatelet therapy should be continued. Risks of perioperative bleeding and of acute stent thrombosis have to be considered simultaneously. The bleeding risk depends primarily on the kind of surgery and on patient comorbidity. The risk of stent thrombosis is increased in these patients due to the thrombogenic surface of the stents. The main determinants are hereby the time duration after stent implantation, the kind of the stent [uncoated (bare-metal stent, BMS) or coated (drug-eluting stent, DES)], as well as angiographic and clinical patient factors. Therefore, perioperative antiplatelet therapy has to be individually adapted for each patient. Bridging with heparin is ineffective. Bridging with intravenous antiplatelet drugs during the perioperative interruption of oral antiplatelet therapy might be a potential procedure in high-risk patients. Whether bedside monitoring of antiplatelet therapy improves the perioperative management of these patients and reduces adverse outcome is object of current studies.
    Der Anaesthesist 10/2009; 58(10):971-985. DOI:10.1007/s00101-009-1628-7 · 0.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The light field transmission in dielectric waveguides and optical fibers with various profiles of refractive index in the linear case has been explored. The nonlinear case of transmission has been considered with the help of envelope dynamics analysis of the flat wave packet dependent on the longitudinal coordinate and time or the complex amplitude dependent on three coordinates and time. Moreover, the vector field dependent on longitudinal coordinates and time has been described in an anisotropic medium. In the present paper, the vector field dependent on three coordinates and time in optical fibers with step and gradient refractive index profiles is considered.
    4thLaser and Fiber-Optical Networks Modeling, 2002. Proceedings of LFNM 2002. International Workshop on; 02/2002
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The contribution of platelets in the pathophysiology of thromboses has established antiplatelet therapy as a cornerstone for prevention or treatment of these disorders. However, patients on antiplatelet drugs undergoing surgery face the life-threatening dilemma between the risk of perioperative thrombosis by ceasing therapy and restoring platelet function versus the risk of surgical bleeding by its continuation. According to their mechanism of action, antiplatelet drugs can be conventionally classified as agents that inhibit cyclooxygenase, block the platelet adenosine diphosphate P2Y12 receptor, inhibit phosphodiesterase, or block platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa. Although several tests have been developed to assess platelet inhibition by most of these compounds, studies to date have not been able to reliably evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of these tests to predict hemorrhage and/or blood loss, and accordingly perioperative assessment of drug-induced platelet inhibition cannot be recommended as yet. Although several management options are available to counteract the hemorrhagic risk of surgical patients using antiplatelet agents, perioperative discontinuation of these drugs is the preferable choice wherever possible. The use of platelet transfusions should be limited where necessary to the treatment of major, life-threatening bleeding. The contribution of newer hemostatic agents, such as desmopressin and recombinant activated factor VII, is yet to be fully determined, and there remain many challenges and unresolved issues in the clinical care of these patients.
    Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry 05/2009; 405(1-2):8-16. DOI:10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.055 · 2.76 Impact Factor