Prevalence and risk factors of clopidogrel non-response among Saudi patients undergoing coronary angiography

7Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: To estimate the prevalence of clopidogrel non-response and identify its risk factors among Saudi patients. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at Prince Sultan Cardiac Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia between January and June 2013, to assess the degree of platelet inhibition using the VerifyNow assay (Accumetrics, San Diego, CA, USA) after receiving clopidogrel standard loading dose. Clopidogrel resistance was defined as ≤15% platelet inhibition or >213 P2Y12 reaction units (PRU). Results: Three hundred and four patients were included in the study. The mean age was 60.3 ± 11.4 years, and 73% were males. Clopidogrel doses were 300 mg (57%), 600 mg (27%), and 75 mg (16%). All patients used aspirin (81 mg in 94%). Approximately 66% (200/304) showed in vitro clopidogrel non-response, 54% had low platelet inhibitions, and 61% had high post-loading PRU. Using multivariate regression analysis that included all significant characteristics; only diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.30-4.27, p=0.005) and higher preloading PRU (OR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.40-4.11, p=0.002) remained significantly associated with higher clopidogrel non-response while myocardial infarction (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15-0.81, p=0.014) remained significantly associated with lower clopidogrel non-response. The associations of morbid obesity and diuretics use with higher clopidogrel non-response were slightly attenuated. Conclusion: Our findings indicate a high rate of clopidogrel in-vitro non-response among Saudi patients undergoing coronary angiography.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sakr, H. I., Alamri, H. S., Almoghairi, A. M., Alkhudair, A. A., & Al Masood, A. S. (2016). Prevalence and risk factors of clopidogrel non-response among Saudi patients undergoing coronary angiography. Saudi Medical Journal, 37(2), 166–172. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2016.2.14263

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free