A randomised trial has suggested that a single 75 mg dose of Clopidogrel (administered the night before surgery in addition to daily 75 mg Aspirin) significantly reduces post-CEA embolisation. We hypothesized that this model of dual antiplatelet therapy might significantly reduce the need for adjuvant Dextran therapy.
Methods: Retrospective audit of prospectively acquired data in 297 patients undergoing CEA between 01.08.2006 and 30.07.2009. All received routine Aspirin (75 mg daily) in addition to a single 75 mg dose BEZ235 mouse of Clopidogrel the night before surgery. All underwent completion angioscopy and those with a temporal window (n = 270) underwent intra- and post-operative
TCD monitoring.
Results: High rate embolisation requiring Dextran (>25 emboli in any 10 min period) occurred in only
1/270 patients (0.4%), significantly less than the 3.2% rate in historical controls where Clopidogrel was not administered. There were no pen-operative deaths, but 3/297 patients suffered non-disabling strokes (intra-operative extension of a pre-existing deficit, haemorrhage into lentiform nucleus after hypertensive crisis, contralateral embolic stroke). The overall 30-day death/stroke rate (1.0%) was not-significantly lower than the 2.6% rate observed in the preceding 821 patients.
Conclusions: 75 mg Clopidogrel administered the night before surgery (in addition to daily 75 mg Aspirin) was associated with a significant reduction in post-operative embolisation and Dextran utilisation. No ipsilateral thromboembolic ischaemic events selleck chemical occurred in this series. As a consequence of this audit, one dose of 75 mg Clopidogrel will continue to be given pre-operatively (in addition to daily 75 mg Aspirin) and routine post-operative TCD monitoring has now ceased. (C) 2010 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.”
“AimsThis paper examines the strategies and arguments used
by segments of the alcohol industry to delay the introduction of mandatory health warning labels SNS-032 ic50 on alcohol containers in Australia. These strategies are compared with those used by the tobacco industry to delay the introduction of warning labels for cigarettes.
MethodsSubmissions made by members of the alcohol industry to the Australian Government’s review of labelling and Parliamentary Inquiry into Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders were analysed.
ResultsSegments of the alcohol industry have delayed the introduction of mandatory alcohol health warning labels in Australia by questioning the rationale and evidence base for labels; arguing that they will cause damage to public health and the economy; lobbying and seeking to influence government and political representatives including through monetary donations; and introducing its own voluntary labelling scheme.