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: We examined the association between sweet-beverage consumption (including total, sugar-sweetened, and artificially sweetened soft drink and juice and nectar consumption) and pancreatic cancer risk.
DESIGN: The study was conducted within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. A total of 477,199 participants (70.2% women) with a mean age of 51 y at baseline were included, and 865 exocrine pancreatic cancers were diagnosed after a median follow-up of 11.60 y (IQR: 10.10-12.60 y). Sweet-beverage consumption was assessed with the use of validated dietary questionnaires at baseline. HRs and 95% CIs were obtained with the use of multivariable Cox regression models that were stratified by age, sex, and center and adjusted for educational level, physical activity, smoking status, and alcohol consumption. Associations with total soft-drink consumption were adjusted for juice and nectar consumption and vice versa.
RESULTS: Total soft-drink consumption (HR per 100 g/d: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.07), sugar-sweetened soft-drink consumption (HR per 100 g/d: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.08), and artificially sweetened soft-drink consumption (HR per 100 g/d: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.10) were not associated with pancreatic cancer risk. Juice and nectar consumption was inversely associated with pancreatic cancer risk (HR per 100 g/d: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.99); this association remained statistically significant after adjustment for body size, type 2 diabetes, and energy intake.
CONCLUSIONS: Soft-drink consumption does not seem to be associated with pancreatic cancer risk. Juice and nectar consumption might be associated with a modest decreased pancreatic cancer risk. Additional studies with specific information on juice and nectar subtypes are warranted to clarify these results.
Methods: We searched 4 electronic databases (Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL) and internet sources for randomized controlled trials, ongoing clinical trials, and unpublished studies up to August 2016. Studies that assessed CVCs with antimicrobial impregnation with nonimpregnated catheters or catheters with another impregnation were included. Primary outcomes were clinically diagnosed sepsis, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), and all-cause mortality. We performed a network meta-analysis to estimate risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results: Sixty studies with 17255 catheters were included. The effects of 14 impregnations were investigated. Both CRBSI and catheter colonization were the most commonly evaluated outcomes. Silver-impregnated CVCs significantly reduced clinically diagnosed sepsis compared with silver-impregnated cuffs (RR, 0.54 [95% CI, .29-.99]). When compared to no impregnation, significant CRBSI reduction was associated with minocycline-rifampicin (RR, 0.29 [95% CI, .16-.52]) and silver (RR, 0.57 [95% CI, .38-.86]) impregnations. No impregnations significantly reduced all-cause mortality. For catheter colonization, significant decreases were shown by miconazole-rifampicin (RR, 0.14 [95% CI, .05-.36]), 5-fluorouracil (RR, 0.34 [95% CI, .14-.82]), and chlorhexidine-silver sulfadiazine (RR, 0.60 [95% CI, .50-.72]) impregnations compared with no impregnation. None of the studies evaluated antibiotic/antiseptic resistance as the outcome.
Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that the minocycline-rifampicin-impregnated CVC appears to be the most effective in preventing CRBSI. However, its overall benefits in reducing clinical sepsis and mortality remain uncertain. Surveillance for antibiotic resistance attributed to the routine use of antimicrobial-impregnated CVCs should be emphasized in future trials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30 to <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of >300-5,000 mg/g were randomized to 100 mg of canagliflozin or a placebo. The effects of canagliflozin treatment on pre-specified efficacy and safety outcomes were examined using Cox proportional hazards regression between participants from EA countries (China, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan) and the remaining participants.
RESULTS: Of 4,401 participants, 604 (13.7%) were from EA countries; 301 and 303 were assigned to the canagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively. Canagliflozin lowered the risk of primary outcome (composite of end-stage kidney disease, doubling of serum creatinine level, or renal or cardiovascular death) in EA participants (hazard ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.84). The effects of canagliflozin on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in EA participants were generally similar to those of the remaining participants. Safety outcomes were similar between the EA and non-EA participants.
CONCLUSIONS: In the CREDENCE trial, the risk of renal and cardiovascular events was safely reduced in participants from EA countries at high risk of renal events.