METHODS: The authors randomized 10,010 patients with or at risk of atherosclerosis and scheduled for noncardiac surgery in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to clonidine/aspirin, clonidine/aspirin placebo, clonidine placebo/aspirin, or clonidine placebo/aspirin placebo. Patients started taking aspirin or placebo just before surgery; those not previously taking aspirin continued daily for 30 days, and those taking aspirin previously continued for 7 days. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive clonidine or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued for 72 h.
RESULTS: Neither aspirin nor clonidine had a significant effect on the primary 1-yr outcome, a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, with a 1-yr hazard ratio for aspirin of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.12; P = 0.948; 586 patients [11.8%] vs. 589 patients [11.8%]) and a hazard ratio for clonidine of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20; P = 0.218; 608 patients [12.1%] vs. 567 patients [11.3%]), with effect on death or nonfatal infarction. Reduction in death and nonfatal myocardial infarction from aspirin in patients who previously had percutaneous coronary intervention at 30 days persisted at 1 yr. Specifically, the hazard ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.95) in those with previous percutaneous coronary intervention and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.91to 1.16) in those without (interaction P = 0.033). There was no significant effect of either drug on death, cardiovascular complications, cancer, or chronic incisional pain at 1 yr (all P > 0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Neither perioperative aspirin nor clonidine have significant long-term effects after noncardiac surgery. Perioperative aspirin in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention showed persistent benefit at 1 yr, a plausible sub-group effect.
Objective: To study the association of IL-1 (A and B) gene polymorphisms with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyp (CRSwNP) and without nasal polyp (CRSsNP), and other factors related.
Methods: This is a case-controlled study which include a total of 138 subjects recruited from Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery clinic in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. Genotyping of the IL-1A (+4845G, +4845T) and IL-1B (-511C, -511T) were performed with restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis.
Results: There was a statistical significant association between IL-1B (-511C, -511T) polymorphism with CRSwNP and CRSsNP (p < 0.001). The CT genotype of IL-1B was markedly increased in CRSwNP subjects (52.2%). However, there was no significant association found between IL-1A (+4845G, +4845T) with CRSwNP and CRSsNP (p = 0.093). No association was found in factors related to CRS, which included asthma, atopy, allergy, aspirin sensitivity, and family history of nasal polyp (p value of 0.382, 0.382, 0.144, >0.95, and 0.254, respectively).
Conclusion: This study indicates an association of IL-1B (-511C, -511T) polymorphism with CRSwNP and CRSsNP in our population, hence there is a possibility of IL-1B involvement in modulating pathogenesis of CRS. There was no significant association of IL-1A (+4845G, +4845T) polymorphism with CRSwNP and CRSsNP, and other factors related.
METHODS: Our objective was to update and systematically evaluate the evidence for aspirin and other NSAIDs on the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas taking into consideration the risks of random error and to appraise the quality of evidence using GRADE (The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Retrieved trials were evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias instrument. Meta-analytic estimates were calculated with random-effects model and random errors were evaluated with trial sequential analysis (TSA).
RESULTS: In patients with a previous history of colorectal cancer or adenomas, low-dose aspirin (80-160 mg/day) compared to placebo taken for 2 to 4 years reduces the risk of recurrent colorectal adenomas (relative risk (RR), 0.80 [95% CI (confidence interval), 0.70-0.92]). TSA indicated a firm evidence for this beneficial effect. The evidence indicated moderate GRADE quality. Low-dose aspirin also reduces the recurrence of advanced adenomas (RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.44-0.99]); however, TSA indicated lack of firm evidence for a beneficial effect. High-dose aspirin (300-325 mg/day) did not statistically reduce the recurrent adenomas (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.68-1.18]). Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (e.g. celecoxib 400 mg/day) were associated with a significant decrease in the recurrence of both adenomas (RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.59-0.72]) and advanced adenomas (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.57]); however, this association did not persist and there was a trend of an increased risk of recurrent adenomas observed 2 years after the withdrawal.
CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the beneficial effect of low-dose aspirin on recurrence of any adenomas; however, effect on advanced adenomas was inconclusive. COX-2 inhibitors seem to be more effective in preventing recurrence of adenomas; however, there was a trend of an increased risk of recurrence of adenomas observed after discontinuing regular use.
METHODS: Systematic review and NMA of randomised controlled trials were performed, and the most suitable CPA was chosen based on efficacy and the most favourable risk-benefit profile. The economic benefits of CPA alone, 3 yearly SC alone, and a combination of CPA and SC were determined using the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in the Malaysian health-care perspective. Outcomes were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2018 US Dollars ($) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and life-years (LYs) gained.
RESULTS: According to NMA, the risk-benefit profile favours the use of aspirin at very-low-dose (ASAVLD, ≤ 100 mg/day) for secondary prevention in individuals with previous ACAs. Celecoxib is the most effective CPA but the cardiovascular adverse events are of concern. According to CEA, the combination strategy (ASAVLD with 3-yearly SC) was cost-saving and dominates its competitors as the best buy option. The probability of being cost-effective for ASAVLD alone, 3-yearly SC alone, and combination strategy were 22%, 26%, and 53%, respectively. Extending the SC interval to five years in combination strategy was more cost-effective when compared to 3-yearly SC alone (ICER of $484/LY gain and $1875/QALY). However, extending to ten years in combination strategy was not cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: ASAVLD combined with 3-yearly SC in individuals with ACAs may be a cost-effective strategy for CRC prevention. An extension of SC intervals to five years can be considered in resource-limited countries.
DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of STEMI patients from 18 hospitals across Malaysia contributing to the Malaysian National Cardiovascular Database-acute coronary syndrome) registry (NCVD-ACS) year 2006-2013.
PARTICIPANTS: 16 517 patients diagnosed of STEMI from 18 hospitals in Malaysia from the year 2006 to 2013.
PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital and 30 day post-discharge mortality.
RESULTS: CS complicates 10.6% of all STEMIs in this study. They had unfavourable premorbid conditions and poor outcomes. The in-hospital mortality rate was 34.1% which translates into a 7.14 times mortality risk increment compared with STEMI without CS. Intravenous thrombolysis remained as the main urgent reperfusion modality. Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in CS conferred a 40% risk reduction over non-invasive therapy but were only done in 33.6% of cases. Age over 65, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, chronic lung and kidney disease conferred higher risk of mortality.
CONCLUSION: Mortality rates of CS complicating STEMI in Malaysia are high. In-hospital PCI confers a 40% mortality risk reduction but the rate of PCI among our patients with CS complicating STEMI is still low. Efforts are being made to increase access to invasive therapy for these patients.
METHOD: A 12-month single blinded multicenter randomized control trial was designed to investigate the measured variables [Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c), Renal function, Albumin Creatinine Ratio (ACR) etc.]. The trial was randomized into 2 experimental parallel arms (ascorbic acid vs acetylsalicylic acid) were blinded with study supplements in combination with metformin and findings were compared to control arm with metformin alone and blinded with placebo. Withdrawal criteria was defined to maintain the equity and balance in the participants in the whole trial.
FINDING: Patients with metformin and ascorbic acid (parallel arm I) was twice more likely to reduce HbA1c than metformin alone (control arm) in a year (OR 2.31 (95% CI 1.87-4.42) p