Continuation Of Aspirin Research Articles

Long-Term Effects of Low-Dose Aspirin on Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Bleeding Complications in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention is determined by the balance of risks of cardiovascular events and adverse effects. We assessed the long-term gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding with low-dose aspirin in diabetic patients. The Japanese Primary Prevention of Atherosclerosis with Aspirin for Diabetes (JPAD) trial was a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose aspirin in patients with type 2 diabetes. As a posthoc analysis, we investigated the incidence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding in aspirin (100 mg enteric-coated aspirin or 81 mg buffered aspirin daily) and no-aspirin groups within and beyond 3 years. Of 2535 patients (mean age 65 years, 55% male) followed for a median of 11.2 years, 1258 were included in the aspirin group (951 enteric-coated, 208 buffered, 99 unknown) and 1277 were included in the no-aspirin group. The cumulative incidence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding was higher in the aspirin group than the no-aspirin group (8.8% vs. 5.7% at 18 years; p<0.0001). The increased risk in the aspirin group was prominent within 3 years, and thehazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] of the aspirin group was 7.10 [3.21-15.7], but attenuated beyond 3years (HR 1.20 [0.76-1.89]). In 1159 patients in the aspirin group, the cumulative incidence was lower in the enteric-coated than in the buffered aspirin groups (2.9% vs. 7.3%; p=0.003) within 3 years, and the adjusted HR of enteric-coated aspirin was 0.38 [0.20-0.72] compared with the buffered aspirin group. The upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding of low-dose aspirin within 3 years, and the aspirin formulations, were relevant for decision making of initiation and continuation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention.

Aspirin Monotherapy vs No Antiplatelet Therapy in Stable Patients With Coronary Stents Undergoing Low-to-Intermediate Risk Noncardiac Surgery

BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend the perioperative continuation of aspirin in patients with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) undergoing noncardiac surgery. However, supporting evidence is limited. ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare continuing aspirin monotherapy vs temporarily holding all antiplatelet therapy before noncardiac surgery in patients with previous DES implantation. MethodsWe randomly assigned patients who had received a DES >1 year previously and were undergoing elective noncardiac surgery either to continue aspirin or to discontinue all antiplatelet agents 5 days before noncardiac surgery. Antiplatelet therapy was recommended to be resumed no later than 48 hours after surgery, unless contraindicated. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke between 5 days before and 30 days after noncardiac surgery. ResultsA total of 1,010 patients underwent randomization. Among 926 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (462 patients in aspirin monotherapy group and 464 patients in the no-antiplatelet therapy group), the primary composite outcome occurred in 3 patients (0.6%) in the aspirin monotherapy group and 4 patients (0.9%) in the no antiplatelet group (difference, −0.2 percentage points; 95% CI: −1.3 to 0.9; P > 0.99). There was no stent thrombosis in either group. The incidence of major bleeding did not differ significantly between groups (6.5% vs 5.2%; P = 0.39), whereas minor bleeding was significantly more frequent in the aspirin group (14.9% vs 10.1%; P = 0.027). ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing low-to-intermediate risk noncardiac surgery >1 year after stent implantation primarily with a DES, in the setting of lower-than-expected event rates, we failed to identify a significant difference between perioperative aspirin monotherapy and no antiplatelet therapy with respect to ischemic outcomes or major bleeding. (Perioperative Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Drug-eluting Stent Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery [ASSURE-DES]; NCT02797548)

To be or not to be on: aspirin and coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Aspirin's role in secondary prevention for patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD) is well established, validated by numerous landmark trials over the past several decades. However, its perioperative use in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains contentious due to the delicate balance between the risks of thrombosis and bleeding. While continuation of aspirin in patients undergoing CABG following acute coronary syndrome is widely supported due to the high risk of re-infarction, the evidence is less definitive for elective CABG procedures. The literature indicates a significant benefit of aspirin in reducing cardiovascular events in CAD patients, yet its impact on perioperative outcomes in CABG surgery is less clear. Some studies suggest increased bleeding risks without substantial improvement in cardiac outcomes. Specific to elective CABG, evidence is mixed, with some data indicating no significant difference in thrombotic or bleeding complications whether aspirin is continued or withheld preoperatively. Advancements in pharmacological therapies and perioperative care have evolved significantly since the initial aspirin trials, raising questions about the contemporary relevance of earlier findings. Individualized patient assessments and the development of risk stratification tools are needed to optimize perioperative aspirin use in CABG surgery. Further research is essential to establish clearer guidelines and improve patient outcomes. The objective of this review is to critically evaluate the existing evidence into the optimal management of perioperative aspirin in elective CABG patients.

Short- and long-term impact of aspirin cessation in older adults: a target trial emulation

BackgroundThe net benefit of aspirin cessation in older adults remains uncertain. This study aimed to use observational data to emulate a randomized trial of aspirin cessation versus continuation in older adults without cardiovascular disease (CVD).MethodsPost hoc analysis using a target trial emulation framework applied to the immediate post-trial period (2017–2021) of a study of low-dose aspirin initiation in adults aged ≥ 70 years (ASPREE; NCT01038583). Participants from Australia and the USA were included if they were free of CVD at the start of the post-trial intervention period (time zero, T0) and had been taking open-label or randomized aspirin immediately before T0. The two groups in the target trial were as follows: aspirin cessation (participants who were taking randomized aspirin immediately before T0; assumed to have stopped at T0 as instructed) versus aspirin continuation (participants on open-label aspirin at T0 regardless of their randomized treatment; assumed to have continued at T0). The outcomes after T0 were incident CVD, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, and major bleeding during 3, 6, and 12 months (short-term) and 48 months (long-term) follow-up. Hazard ratios (HRs) comparing aspirin cessation to continuation were estimated from propensity-score (PS) adjusted Cox proportional-hazards regression models.ResultsWe included 6103 CVD-free participants (cessation: 5427, continuation: 676). Over both short- and long-term follow-up, aspirin cessation versus continuation was not associated with elevated risk of CVD, MACE, and all-cause mortality (HRs, at 3 and 48 months respectively, were 1.23 and 0.73 for CVD, 1.11 and 0.84 for MACE, and 0.23 and 0.79 for all-cause mortality, p > 0.05), but cessation had a reduced risk of incident major bleeding events (HRs at 3 and 48 months, 0.16 and 0.63, p < 0.05). Similar findings were seen for all outcomes at 6 and 12 months, except for a lowered risk of all-cause mortality in the cessation group at 12 months.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that deprescribing prophylactic aspirin might be safe in healthy older adults with no known CVD.

Safety and complications of continuation of aspirin therapy in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic simple prostatectomy

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of continued perioperative aspirin at the time of robotic assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP). We performed a retrospective review of our IRB approved institutional database of patients who underwent RASP between 2013 and 2022. Comparative groups included patients taking aspirin in the perioperative period and those not taking aspirin pre-operatively. The primary outcome was any post-operative bleeding related complication using the modified Clavien–Dindo classification. Secondary outcomes included the identification of risk factors for increased blood loss in the entire study population, operative time, and blood transfusion requirement. 143 patients underwent RASP of which 55 (38.5%) patients continued perioperative aspirin therapy and 88 (61.5%) patients did not. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. Patients taking perioperative aspirin had a higher rate of hypertension (74.5% vs 58.0%, p = 0.04) and other cardiovascular disease (30.9% vs 11.4%, p = 0.007). Postoperative complications were similar between the groups (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3; p = 0.43). Median blood loss (150 cc vs 150 cc, p = 0.38), percentage drop in hemoglobin (13.4 vs 13.2, p = 0.94) and blood transfusion rate (3.6 vs 1.1, p = 0.56) were also similar between groups. The median blood loss was 150 ml for the whole study population. On regression analysis, neither aspirin nor any other variable was associated with increased blood loss (> 150 ml). Aspirin can be safely continued perioperatively in patients undergoing RASP without any risk of bleeding related complications, blood loss, or increased transfusion rate.

Aspin: neurosurgical aspirin intervention prognostic study — perioperative continuation versus discontinuation of aspirin in lumbar spinal surgery, a randomized controlled, noninferiority trial

RationaleAspirin is typically discontinued in cranial and spinal surgery because of the increased risk of hemorrhagic complications, but comes together with the risk of resulting in an increase of cardiac and neurologic thrombotic perioperative events.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to investigate the non-inferiority of perioperative continuation of aspirin patients undergoing low complex lumbar spinal surgery, compared with the current policy of perioperative discontinuation of aspirin.Study designA randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups of 277 cases (554 in total).Study populationPatients undergoing low complex lumbar spinal surgery and using aspirin. All patients are aged >18 years.InterventionPeri-operative continuation of aspirin.Study outcomesPrimary study outcome: composite of the following bleeding complications:Neurological deterioration as a result of hemorrhage in the surgical area with cauda and/or nerve root compression.Post-surgical anemia with hemoglobin level lower than 5 mmol/l, requiring transfusion.Subcutaneous hematoma leading to wound leakage and pain higher than NRS=7.Major and/or minor hemorrhage in any other body system according to the definition of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding scale.Secondary study outcomes:Each of the individual components of the primary outcomeAbsolute mean difference in operative blood loss between the study armsThrombo-embolic-related complications:Myocardial infarctionVenous thromboembolismStrokeArterial thromboembolismFurther study outcomesAnticoagulant treatment satisfaction by the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and general health by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS Global-10) in the pre- and postoperative phase.Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit, and group relatednessParticipation in this study imposes no additional risk to patients. Currently, there is no consensus on whether or not aspirin should be discontinued before cranial or spinal surgery. Currently, aspirin is typically discontinued in cranial and spinal surgery, because of a potential increased risk of hemorrhagic complication. An argument not based on a clinical trial. However, this policy might delay surgical procedures or carry the risk of resulting in an increase in cardiac and neurologic thrombotic perioperative events. It is unclear if the possibility of an increase in hemorrhage-related complications outweighs the risk of an increase in cardiac and neurologic thrombotic perioperative events.Furthermore, the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will be asked for safety analysis by monitoring the study.There are no further disadvantages to participating in this study. Outcome measurements are recorded during admission and regular outpatient visits, and thus, do not require additional visits to the hospital.

Safety of Continuous Low-dose Aspirin Therapy for Lumbar Decompression Alone

Safety of Continuous Low-dose Aspirin Therapy for Lumbar Decompression Alone

Preoperative continuation of aspirin before isolated heart valve surgery and postoperative bleeding and transfusion: a single-center retrospective study

Background The risks and benefits of preoperative aspirin continuation in patients undergoing isolated heart valve replacement surgery are unclear. We investigated the effect of aspirin continuation on the risk of bleeding and transfusion in these patients. Methods In this single center, retrospective study, among 474 adult patients who underwent isolated heart valve surgery between April 2013 and June 2018, 269 continued aspirin within 5 days before surgery (aspirin group) and 205 patients did not take or stopped aspirin no later than 5 days before surgery (non-aspirin group). The chi-square test, the Mann-Whitney U-test, and the Student’s T-test were used to compare data between the groups. Univariate and Multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess crude and adjusted relationships between outcome and exposure. Results The primary outcome, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, occurred in 59 patients (22%) of the aspirin group and in 24 patients (12%) of the non-aspirin group (p = 0.004). After adjustment for confounding factors, continuation of aspirin was no longer associated with RBC transfusion (aOR1.8;95%CI,0.98–3.2;p = 0.06). The amount of allogenic blood products, the incidence of surgical re-exploration for bleeding, the volume of re-transfused cell-saved blood, and the cumulative chest tube drainage during the first 24 postoperative hours were similar between groups. Conclusion Preoperative continuation of aspirin in patients undergoing isolated heart valve surgery is neither associated with a higher incidence of RBC transfusion, nor with larger perioperative blood loss, or more frequent surgical revision for bleeding. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05151796)

Perioperative aspirin and coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Abstract Background Although consensus guidelines demonstrate clear benefit for the continuation of aspirin in patients awaiting coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) following an acute coronary syndrome where risk of re-infarction outweighs bleeding risk, the evidence remains unclear in the case of elective CABG. We performed the largest to date systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcomes between CABG patients who stopped and continued aspirin perioperatively. Methods A thorough search of PubMed, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases was conducted to 25th July 2022 for randomized control trials that evaluated patients undergoing CABG. Summary odds ratios were calculated using a random effects model for dichotomous and continuous variables. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted in order to explore sources of heterogeneity. Results 16 eligible studies were included with a total of 6188 patients who underwent CABG. Patients who continued Aspirin perioperatively demonstrated an increased risk of all cause mortality [OR 1.37 (0.81-2.33)] and reduced risk of perioperative myocardial infarction [OR 0.81 (0.55-1.18)], however neither were statistically significant. No significant difference was observed between low-dose and higher doses of Aspirin. There was minimal heterogeneity amongst included studies (i2 = 0%, p=0.97 and i2=33%, p=0.13 respectively). Continuing aspirin produced a modest increase in postoperative blood loss [mean difference 66.12mL (-1.45-133.69)], as was a dose greater than 100mg [216.87(-152.99-586.72), p=0.60], however this was not statistically significant. Conclusion Continuing Aspirin before CABG is not associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality, of perioperative myocardial infarction, and of postoperative bleeding. Future trials with more robust methodology should be aimed at further evaluating this patient cohort to guide perioperative Aspirin use.

Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of TWILIGHT and TICO Randomized Trials.

Dual antiplatelet therapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor coupled with aspirin for 1 year is the recommended treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). As an alternative, monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor after a short period of dual antiplatelet therapy has emerged as a bleeding reduction strategy. We pooled individual patient data from randomized trials that included patients with ACS undergoing PCI treated with an initial 3-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy followed by ticagrelor monotherapy versus continued ticagrelor plus aspirin. Patients sustaining a major ischemic or bleeding event in the first 3 months after PCI were excluded from analysis. The primary outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding occurring between 3 and 12 months after index PCI. The key secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs were generated using Cox regression with a one-stage approach in the intention-to-treat population. The pooled cohort (n=7529) had a mean age of 62.8 years, 23.2% were female, and 55% presented with biomarker-positive ACS. Between 3 and 12 months, ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin (0.8% versus 2.1%; hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.24-0.56]; P<0.001). Rates of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were not significantly different between groups (2.4% versus 2.7%; hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.68-1.21]; P=0.515). Findings were unchanged among patients presenting with biomarker-positive ACS. Among patients with ACS undergoing PCI who have completed a 3-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy, discontinuation of aspirin followed by ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced major bleeding without incremental ischemic risk compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42023449646.

Is it Safe to Continue Aspirin in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?

To evaluate peri-operative outcomes in patients on chronic aspirin therapy undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), with and without discontinuation of aspirin. Anti-coagulation and anti-platelet therapy are contraindications for PCNL per American Urological Association guidelines due to bleeding risk. However, there is potentially increased cardiovascular risk with peri-procedural aspirin withdrawal. Patients on chronic aspirin undergoing PCNL between January 2014 and May 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by continued or discontinued aspirin >5days preoperatively. Hematologic complications, transfusions, and thrombotic complications were assessed with logistic regression model. Three hundred twenty-five patients on chronic aspirin therapy underwent PCNL-85 continued and 240 discontinued aspirin. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin change, estimated blood loss, transfusions, creatinine change, thrombotic complications, 30-days re-admissions, complications, or 30-day emergency department visits. Patients who continued aspirin had longer length of stay (1.6 vs 1.9days, P=.03). American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3 (OR 3.2, P=.02, 95% confidence intervals (CI) [1.2-8.4]), ASA score of 4 (OR 4.0, P=.02, 95% CI [1.2-13.1]), Black race, and previous smoking (OR 2.1, P=.02, 95% CI [1.1-3.9]) was associated with continued aspirin. Body mass index ≥30 was associated with aspirin discontinuation (OR 0.9, P=.004, 95% CI [0.9-1.0]). Increased postoperative hematologic complications were associated with additional anticoagulation medication (OR 2.9, P=.04, 95% CI [1.0-4.4]). Continued aspirin use did not increase in postoperative complications in patients undergoing PCNL. Patients who are on additional anticoagulation medication are at risk of hematologic complications.

Safety and Clinical Results of Continuous Low-Dose Aspirin in Microendoscopic Laminectomy.

It remains controversial whether it is better to continue oral low-dose aspirin (LDA) during the perioperative period in spinal surgery. This study aims to evaluate the safety of continued LDA administration in the perioperative periods of microendoscopic laminectomy (MEL) by assessing perioperative complications and clinical outcomes. We ultimately included 88 patients (35 males, 53 females) who underwent one level of MEL for lumbar spinal canal stenosis from April 2016 to March 2022. Patients who did not undergo anticoagulation therapy were classified into Group A (65 patients), those who stopped anticoagulation therapy at the perioperative periods were classified into Group B (9 patients), and those who continued oral administration of LDA throughout the perioperative periods were classified into Group C (14 patients). Surgery time, intraoperative estimate blood loss (EBL), differences between hemoglobin (Hb) and platelet (Plt) before and after surgery, perioperative complications, and cross-sectional area of hematoma and dural sac on MRI taken within 1 week and at 6 months or more after surgery were assessed between three groups. The EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) were also evaluated as the clinical outcomes. There was no statistically significant difference between the three groups in operation time, intraoperative EBL, differences between Hb and Plt before and after surgery, and cross-sectional area of hematoma and dural sac on MRI. A case of hematoma removal was confirmed in Group A. There was also no statistically significant difference between the three groups in EQ-5D, ODI, and each domain of JOABPEQ. The continuation of LDA throughout the perioperative periods did not affect perioperative complications and clinical outcomes of one-level MEL. In MEL, it might be possible to continue oral administration of LDA throughout the perioperative periods.

Impact of Aspirin Intake on Postoperative Survival after Primary Pancreatic Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma-A Single-Center Evaluation.

(1) Background: The intake of aspirin (ASS) has been demonstrated to have a relevant impact on the pathogenesis, incidence and outcome in different solid gastrointestinal tumors. However, data on the effect of ASS on the short-term outcome and the long-term survival in patients with pancreatic carcinoma are still limited. (2) Methods: A total of 213 patients who underwent primary resection of PDAC at the University Hospital of Erlangen from January 2000 to December 2018 were included in this retrospective single-center study in total. Patients were stratified according to the aspirin intake into three groups: continuous aspirin intake (cASS), perioperatively interrupted aspirin intake (iASS) and no aspirin intake (no ASS) at the timepoint of surgery. The postoperative outcome as well as long-term survival were compared between the groups. (3) Results: There were no differences regarding postoperative morbidity (iASS: 54% vs. cASS: 53% vs. no ASS: 64%, p = 0.448) and in-hospital mortality (iASS: 4% vs. cASS: 10% vs. no ASS: 3%, p = 0.198) between the groups. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) did not differ in the groups when comparing the ASS-intake status (OS: iASS 17.8 months vs. cASS 19.6 months vs. no ASS 21.6 months, p = 0.489; DFS: iASS 14.0 months vs. cASS 18.3 months vs. no ASS 14.7 months, p = 0.957). Multivariate analysis revealed that age (hazard ratio (HR) 2.2, p < 0.001), lymph node-positive status (HR 2.0, p < 0.001), R status 1 or 2 (HR 2.8, p < 0.001) and differentiation with a grading of 3 (HR 1.7, p = 0.005) were significant independent prognostic factors regarding the OS. Moreover, age (HR 1.5, p = 0.040), lymph node-positive status (HR 1.8, p = 0.002) and high-grade (G3) carcinomas (HR 1.5, p = 0.037) could be identified as independent prognostic parameters for DFS. (4) Conclusions: In patients undergoing primary surgery for curative resection of pancreatic carcinoma, the perioperative intake of ASS had no significant impact on postoperative outcome, overall and disease-free survival.

Assessing the safety of continued perioperative antithrombotic therapy in endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis

PurposeGiven the increasing utilization of endoscopic surgery, particularly for airway stenosis management in the era of COVID-19 due to prolonged intubation, it is important to examine whether continuing antithrombotic therapy perioperatively influences bleeding complications. We examined the impact of perioperative antithrombotic use on postoperative bleeding complications following endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis. Materials and methodsRetrospective study from January 2016 to December 2021 of cases of patients ≥18 years who underwent endoscopic airway surgery for posterior glottic, subglottic, and tracheal stenosis at a single institution. Cases were excluded if they were an open airway surgery. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative bleeding complications across cases of patients naive to and on baseline antithrombotic therapy, and those with preoperative continuation versus cessation of antithrombotic therapy. Results258 cases across 96 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these 258 cases, 43.4 % (n = 112) were performed for patients on baseline antithrombotic therapy and 56.6 % (n = 146) for those not on antithrombotic therapy. Likelihood of perioperative continuation of apixaban was 0.052 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 0.002–0.330, p < 0.001). Likelihood of perioperative continuation of aspirin was 9.87 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 2.32–43.0, p < 0.001). Two instances of postoperative bleeding were found: both in patients who were on aspirin without perioperative cessation for COVID-related coagulopathy. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that perioperative continuation of aspirin is relatively safe in the setting of endoscopic surgery for airway stenosis management. Prospective investigations to increase understanding of perioperative antithrombotics for COVID-related coagulopathy are warranted.

Effect of perioperative aspirin continuation on bleeding after pneumonectomy

To investigate the effect of continuous oral aspirin in perioperative period on bleeding in pneumonectomy. A total of 170 patients who underwent pneumonectomy in our hospital from March 2021 to March 2022 were selected as the study objects. All patients took oral aspirin before surgery and did not take other antiplatelet agent or anticoagulants at the same time. The continuation group included 85 cases and continued to take aspirin 100 mg/day during the perioperative period, and the interruption group included 85 cases who stopped aspirin for 7 days before surgery and 3 days after surgery, without bridging therapy. The intraoperative blood loss, operation time, conversion to thoracotomy rate, postoperative bleeding rate, blood transfusion rate, thrombotic events, postoperative drainage volume, length of hospital stay, and total hospital cost of the two groups were compared. There were no statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, operative time, rate of conversion to open, postoperative drainage, hospital stay, and cost between the two groups (p > 0.05), and there were no reoperations due to bleeding between the two groups. Aspirin should be continued throughout the perioperative period in all high-risk patients requiring pneumonectomy after balancing ischemic-bleeding risks.

Aspirin Discontinuation at 24 to 28 Weeks’ Gestation in Pregnancies at High Risk of Preterm Preeclampsia

Aspirin reduces the incidence of preterm preeclampsia by 62% in pregnant individuals at high risk of preeclampsia. However, aspirin might be associated with an increased risk of peripartum bleeding, which could be mitigated by discontinuing aspirin before term (37 weeks of gestation) and by an accurate selection of individuals at higher risk of preeclampsia in the first trimester of pregnancy. To determine whether aspirin discontinuation in pregnant individuals with normal soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 to placental growth factor (sFlt-1:PlGF) ratio between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation was noninferior to aspirin continuation to prevent preterm preeclampsia. Multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3, noninferiority trial conducted in 9 maternity hospitals across Spain. Pregnant individuals (n = 968) at high risk of preeclampsia during the first-trimester screening and an sFlt-1:PlGF ratio of 38 or less at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation were recruited between August 20, 2019, and September 15, 2021; of those, 936 were analyzed (intervention: n = 473; control: n = 463). Follow-up was until delivery for all participants. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to aspirin discontinuation (intervention group) or aspirin continuation until 36 weeks of gestation (control group). Noninferiority was met if the higher 95% CI for the difference in preterm preeclampsia incidences between groups was less than 1.9%. Among the 936 participants, the mean (SD) age was 32.4 (5.8) years; 3.4% were Black and 93% were White. The incidence of preterm preeclampsia was 1.48% (7/473) in the intervention group and 1.73% (8/463) in the control group (absolute difference, -0.25% [95% CI, -1.86% to 1.36%]), indicating noninferiority. Aspirin discontinuation at 24 to 28 weeks of gestation was noninferior to aspirin continuation for preventing preterm preeclampsia in pregnant individuals at high risk of preeclampsia and a normal sFlt-1:PlGF ratio. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03741179 and ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu Identifier: 2018-000811-26.

Effects of statins and aspirin on HCC risk in alcohol-related cirrhosis: nationwide emulated trials.

Observational studies have shown an association between statin or aspirin use and a decreased risk of HCC, but the effects of a well-defined treatment strategy remain unknown. We emulated trials of the effects of continuous statin or aspirin use on HCC risk in patients with cirrhosis due to alcohol-related liver disease (ALD cirrhosis). We specified target trials for statins and, separately, aspirin and emulated them using Danish health care registries. All eligible patients with ALD cirrhosis diagnosed in 2000-2018 were included in either an exposed or an unexposed arm. Patients were followed until HCC or death without HCC. The 5-year risk of HCC was estimated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting. Using statins continuously for 5 years compared with not using statins resulted in a relative risk (RR) of HCC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.45-0.91). The RR of death without HCC was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.65-0.77). For aspirin, the RR was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.60-1.42) for HCC and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.95-1.09) for death without HCC. In patients with ALD cirrhosis, 5 years of continuous statin use resulted in a 33% RR reduction of HCC (number needed to treat = 94) and a 31% RR reduction of death without HCC (number needed to treat = 7). Such strong causal effects are implausible and best explained by uncontrollable confounding, highlighting the need for randomized trials. Aspirin use likely does not affect the risk of HCC or death without HCC.

Safety of Periprocedural Antithrombotics during Pediatric Transplant Liver Biopsies

The purpose of this study was to compare the adverse event (AE) rates of percutaneous pediatric transplant liver biopsies in patients receiving periprocedural antithrombotic agents with those in patients not receiving them. A 19-year retrospective single-center study of ultrasound-guided transplant liver biopsies was conducted. Patients who received aspirin for <5 days (n = 51) or heparin <4 hours (n = 15) before biopsy were separately grouped. AEs were reported using the Society of Interventional Radiology classification. In 276 biopsy samples from patients with a mean age of 6.75 years ± 5.80, the overall AE (P = .72) and moderate AE (P = .78) rates for control and antithrombotic groups were not significantly different. No severe AEs or deaths occurred. In conclusion, aspirin continuation during percutaneous pediatric transplant liver biopsies may be safe, but more studies are necessary to confirm the safety of periprocedural heparin.

The Use of Aspirin Increases the Risk of Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events in Hypertensive Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Real-World Cohort Study

(1) Background: Hypertensive patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are at high risk for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), and the utility of aspirin for primary cardiovascular prevention in this population remains uncertain. (2) Methods: In this retrospective cohort study using data from the Urumchi Hypertension Database (UHDATA), hypertensive patients older than 18 years old with a first-time diagnosis of OSA were divided into three groups depending on aspirin history. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included MACCE components, ischemic events, cardiac events, cerebrovascular events, and gastrointestinal bleeding risk. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was used to balance the confounding factors among the groups, and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). (3) Results: In persistent aspirin users, the risk of MACCE events (HR 2.11, 95%CI 1.23-3.63), ischemic events (HR 2.58, 95%CI 1.42-4.69), cerebrovascular events (HR 2.55, 95%CI 1.44-4.51), and non-fatal cerebral infarction (HR 3.14, 95%CI 1.69-5.84) was significantly elevated. (4) Conclusions: Continuous aspirin use increases the incidence of cardiovascular adverse events in hypertensive patients with OSA receiving aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Deprescription of aspirin for primary prevention is uncommon at discharge in hospitalised patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.

Guidelines recommend against aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in individuals with a history of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). It is unknown how often patients on primary prevention aspirin hospitalised with GIB have aspirin discontinued at discharge. To determine the rate of aspirin deprescription and explore long-term outcomes in patients taking aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events. We evaluated all patients hospitalised at Yale-New Haven Hospital between January 2014 and October 2021 with GIB who were on aspirin for primary prevention. Our primary endpoint was the frequency of aspirin deprescription at discharge. Our secondary endpoints were post-discharge hospitalisations for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or GIB. Time-to-event analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and the log-rank test. We identified 320 patients with GIB on aspirin for primary prevention: median age was 72 (interquartile range [IQR] 61-81) years and 297 (92.8%) were on aspirin 81 mg daily. Only 25 (9.0%) patients surviving their hospitalisation were deprescribed aspirin at discharge. Among 260 patients with follow-up (median 1103 days; IQR 367-1670), MACE developed post-discharge in 2/25 (8.0%) with aspirin deprescription versus 37/235 (15.7%) with aspirin continuation (log-rank p=0.28). 0/25 patients with aspirin deprescription had subsequent hospitalisation for GIB versus 17/235 (7.2%) who continued aspirin (log-rank p=0.13). Aspirin for primary cardiovascular prevention was rarely deprescribed at discharge in patients hospitalised with GIB. Processes designed to ensure appropriate deprescription of aspirin are crucial to improve adherence to guidelines, thereby improving the risk-benefit ratio in patients at high risk of subsequent GIB hospitalisations with minimal increased risk of MACE.