evaluation of aggregometery parameters and efficacy of plavix versus clopidex in patients suffering from ischemic heart disease: a randomized double blind clinical trial

background: ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of death in most societies. in a pathophysiologic point of view, it chiefly results from the formation of thrombus in coronary arteries which could not be only prevented by aspirin. many of clinical trials have shown the long-term benefits of antiplatelet drugs in reducing the risk of thrombotic accidents. objectives: clopidogrel is a thienopyridine derivative used to prevent platelets from adhering together by direct inhibition of adenosine diphosphate (adp), the major factor behind platelets aggregation. sanofi-aventis and bristol-myers are companies that produce clopidogrel by the name of clopidogrel bisulfate. its trade name is plavix, nonetheless in iran it is distributed under the name of clopidex by exir company. in this study we are to compare plavix and clopidex in terms of efficacy as well as aggregometry parameters like adp and prp (platelet rich plasma). patients and methods: this is a double blind clinical trial in which we had two groups of patients suffering from ischemic heart disease who were selected by inclusion criteria. group a (36 patients) took plavix (75 mg/d) and group b (36 patients) used clopidex (75 mg/d) both for 30 days. the aggregometry parameters also consisted of prp and adp that were run on the patients before and after the study. finally, a comparison of aforementioned tests, quality of life, lab parameters and compliance in both groups was provided. results: in groups a and b, the mean levels of prp before the study were 348000 and 340000/µl respectively. the adps were also 73/76 and 68/07 µm that showed no significant difference (p > 0.05).the means of adp5 in group a before and after the study were 66.40 and 43.84 µm respectively that there was significant difference (p = 0.001). the means of adp5 in group b before and after the study were 58.04 and 40.16 µm respectively that there was significant difference (p < 0.001).the means of adp20 in group a before and after the study were 73.76 and 54.97 µm respectively which showed significant difference (p < 0.001). the means of adp20 in group b before and after the study were 68.07 and 52.49 µm respectively which showed significant difference (p = 0.001). difference of adp5 between group a and b was not significant (p = 0.495). difference of adp20 between group a and b was not significant (p = 0.721). the means of prp in group a before and after the study were 348000 and 335000/ µl respectively that there was no significant difference (p = 0.66). the means of prp in group b before and after the study were 340000 and 336000/ µl respectively that indicated no significant difference (p = 0.81). difference of prp between group a and b was not significant (p = 0.563). conclusions: our findings suggested that both drugs significantly lessen the adp level; even so there was no significant difference between two groups in prp and adp factors.