Impact of Calcium Channel Blockers on Aspirin Reactivity in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Purpose Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) do not reduce the risk of initial or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in patients diagnosed with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this current study was to evaluate the association between CCBs and aspirin resistance in patients with CAD. M...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cardiovascular drugs and therapy 2022-06, Vol.36 (3), p.467-473
Main Authors: Kodesh, Afek, Lev, Eli, Leshem-Lev, Dorit, Solodky, Alejandro, Kornowski, Ran, Perl, Leor
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acute coronary syndromes
Aspirin
Calcium channel blockers
Calcium channels
Cardiology
Cardiovascular disease
Coronary artery
Coronary artery disease
Coronary vessels
Diabetes mellitus
Dyslipidemia
Heart diseases
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Multivariate analysis
Myocardial infarction
Original Article
Platelets
Vein & artery diseases
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) do not reduce the risk of initial or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in patients diagnosed with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this current study was to evaluate the association between CCBs and aspirin resistance in patients with CAD. Methods Patients with stable CAD who were regularly taking aspirin (75–100 mg qd) for at least 1 month prior to enrollment in the study were included. The VerifyNow system was used for platelet function testing with high on-aspirin platelet reactivity (HAPR) defined as aspirin reaction units (ARU) >550. We compared patients treated with CCBs versus control group. Results Five hundred three patients with CAD were included in this study, and 88 were treated with CCBs. Mean age (67.9±9.7 in the CCB group vs. 66.5±11.4 in the control group), gender (77.3 male vs. 82.9%), rates of diabetes mellitus (34.7 vs. 36.9%), rates of CKD (23.5 vs. 23.5%), dyslipidemia (85.1 vs. 85.3%), and statin therapy (89.5 vs. 90.7%) were similar. The mean ARU was 465.4±70.0 for patients treated with CCBs versus 445.2±60.0 in controls ( p =0.006). Similarly, 15.9% of CCB patients demonstrated HAPR compared to 7.0% ( p =0.006). The administration of CCBs was independently associated with HAPR in a multivariate analysis (OR 1.72, 95% CI: 1.04–8.91, p =0.047) as well as in propensity score matched analysis (OR 1.56; CI: 1.22–1.93; p
ISSN:0920-3206
1573-7241
DOI:10.1007/s10557-021-07295-8