Contemporary use of platelet function and pharmacogenomic testing among patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States - 18/09/15
, Timothy D. Henry, MD b, Lisa A. McCoy, MS a, Peter B. Berger, MD a, David J. Cohen, MD, MSc c, Mark B. Effron, MD d, Marjorie Zettler, PhD, MPH d, Brian A. Baker, PharmD e, John C. Messenger, MD f, Eric D. Peterson, MD, MPH aRésumé |
Background |
Although platelet function and pharmacogenomic testing have been studied in clinical trials, their adoption into contemporary practice is unknown.
Methods |
We studied patterns of platelet function and pharmacogenomic testing among 10,048 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention at 226 US hospitals in the TRANSLATE-ACS observational study between April 2010 and October 2012, excluding those receiving research protocol-mandated testing. Inverse probability–weighted propensity adjustment was used to compare 1-year bleeding and major adverse cardiac event risks between patients with and without testing.
Results |
Overall, 337 (3.4%) patients underwent predischarge platelet function testing, whereas 85 (0.9%) underwent pharmacogenomic testing; 82% and 93% of hospitals never performed any platelet function or pharmacogenomic testing, respectively. Patients undergoing testing were more likely to be on an adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor preadmission or to have percutaneous coronary intervention of a previously treated lesion. Tested patients were more likely than nontested patients to be switched from clopidogrel to prasugrel/ticagrelor (25.7% vs 9.7%, P < .001) and were more likely to be on prasugrel/ticagrelor 6 months postdischarge (33.8% vs 25.1%, P < .001). No significant differences in 1-year bleeding and major adverse cardiac event risks were observed between tested and nontested patients (adjusted hazard ratios 1.06 [95% CI 0.68-1.65] and 1.21 [95% CI 0.94-1.54], respectively).
Conclusions |
Platelet function and pharmacogenomic testing are rarely performed in contemporary myocardial infarction patients in the United States. When tested, patients were more likely to be treated with higher-potency adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors, yet no significant differences in longitudinal outcomes were observed.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
| E. Marc Jolicoeur, MD, MSc, MHS served as guest editor for this article. |
Vol 170 - N° 4
P. 706-714 - octobre 2015 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Long-term outcomes for women versus men with unstable angina/non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction managed medically without revascularization: Insights from the TaRgeted platelet Inhibition to cLarify the Optimal strateGy to medicallY manage Acute Coronary Syndromes trial
- Peter Clemmensen, Matthew T. Roe, Judith S. Hochman, Derek D. Cyr, Megan L. Neely, Darren K. McGuire, Jan H. Cornel, Kurt Huber, Dmitry Zamoryakhin, Harvey D. White, Paul W. Armstrong, Keith A.A. Fox, Dorairaj Prabhakaran, Erik Magnus Ohman, TRILOGY ACS Investigators
- High-sensitivity troponin T predicts infarct scar characteristics and adverse left ventricular function by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging early after reperfused acute myocardial infarction
- Tuan L. Nguyen, Justin A.K. Phan, Leia Hee, Daniel A. Moses, James Otton, Owen D. Terreblanche, Jessica Xiong, Upul Premawardhana, Rohan Rajaratnam, Craig P. Juergens, Hany R. Dimitri, John K. French, David A.B. Richards, Liza Thomas
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?