-
BMJ Open Feb 2020This review provides insights into the potential for aspirin to preserve bone mineral density (BMD) and reduce fracture risk, building knowledge of the risk-benefit... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This review provides insights into the potential for aspirin to preserve bone mineral density (BMD) and reduce fracture risk, building knowledge of the risk-benefit profile of aspirin.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis of observational studies. Electronic searches of MEDLINE and Embase, and a manual search of bibliographies was undertaken for studies published to 28 March 2018. Studies were included if: participants were men or women aged ≥18 years; the exposure of interest was aspirin; and relative risks, ORs and 95% CIs for the risk of fracture or difference (percentage or absolute) in BMD (measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) between aspirin users and non-users were presented. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists for observational studies. Pooled ORs for any fracture and standardised mean differences (SMDs) for BMD outcomes were calculated using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Aspirin use was associated with a 17% lower odds for any fracture (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.99; I=71%; six studies; n=511 390). Aspirin was associated with a higher total hip BMD for women (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.07; I=0%; three studies; n=9686) and men (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.13, I=0%; two studies; n=4137) although these associations were not significant. Similar results were observed for lumbar spine BMD in women (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.09; I=34%; four studies; n=11 330) and men (SMD 0.08; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.18; one study; n=432).
CONCLUSIONS
While the benefits of reduced fracture risk and higher BMD from aspirin use may be modest for individuals, if confirmed in prospective controlled trials, they may confer a large population benefit given the common use of aspirin in older people.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 32086348
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026876 -
Journal of Aging Research 2022Vascular dementia (VD) is a neurocognitive disorder whose precise definition is still up for debate. VD generally refers to dementia that is primarily caused by... (Review)
Review
Vascular dementia (VD) is a neurocognitive disorder whose precise definition is still up for debate. VD generally refers to dementia that is primarily caused by cerebrovascular disease or impaired cerebral blood flow. It is a subset of vascular cognitive impairment, a class of diseases that relate any cerebrovascular injury as a causal or correlating factor for cognitive decline, most commonly seen in the elderly. Patients who present with both cognitive impairment and clinical or radiologic indications of cerebrovascular pathology should have vascular risk factors, particularly hypertension, examined and treated. While these strategies may be more effective at avoiding dementia than at ameliorating it, there is a compelling case for intensive secondary stroke prevention in these patients. Repeated stroke is related to an increased chance of cognitive decline, and poststroke dementia is connected with an increased risk of death. In general, most physicians follow recommendations for secondary stroke prevention in patients with VD, which can be accomplished by the use of antithrombotic medicines such as antiplatelets (aspirin, clopidogrel, ticlopidine, cilostazol, etc.). In individuals with a high risk of atherosclerosis and those with documented symptomatic cerebrovascular illness, antiplatelets treatment lowers the risk of stroke. While this therapy strategy of prevention and rigorous risk management has a compelling justification, there is only limited and indirect data to support it. The following systematic review examines the role of antiplatelets in the management of vascular dementia in published clinical trials and studies and comments on the current evidence available to support their use and highlights the need for further study.
PubMed: 36245899
DOI: 10.1155/2022/9780067 -
European Journal of Clinical... Jul 2021People with dementia may have indications for aspirin prescription and clinicians are asked to balance the potential risks against benefits. This review examines the...
PURPOSE
People with dementia may have indications for aspirin prescription and clinicians are asked to balance the potential risks against benefits. This review examines the evidence for the risk and benefit of long-term aspirin use in people with dementia aged over 65 years, including randomised controlled trials and observational studies.
METHODS
We searched three databases for research published between 2007 and 2020. Each eligible article was assessed for risk of bias, and confidence in findings was rated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
Four papers met inclusion criteria: one randomised controlled trial, two cohort studies, and one with pooled data. All looked only at dementia of Alzheimer's type, and none addressed myocardial or cerebral infarction as outcomes. Dementia progression was reported by two studies, with conflicting results. The trial found no significant effect of aspirin on mortality (odds ratio aspirin vs. no aspirin 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.97) but found more events of severe bleeding with aspirin (OR aspirin vs. no aspirin 6.9, 1.5-31.2). An excess in intracranial haemorrhage in the aspirin group was judged plausible based on two non-randomised studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The review findings are limited because studies include only people with Alzheimer's-type dementia and lack confirmatory studies, although an increased risk of bleeding events is recognised. Further research that addresses the benefits and risks of aspirin in more representative groups of people with dementia is needed to guide prescribing decisions.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer Disease; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Cardiovascular Diseases; Disease Progression; Hemorrhage; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33483830
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-021-03089-x -
Pharmaceutics Jun 2022This systematic review summarizes the impact of pharmacogenetics on the effect and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antidepressants when used... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review summarizes the impact of pharmacogenetics on the effect and safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antidepressants when used for pain treatment.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines regarding the human in vivo efficacy and safety of NSAIDs and antidepressants in pain treatment that take pharmacogenetic parameters into consideration. Studies were collected from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science up to the cutoff date 18 October 2021.
RESULTS
Twenty-five articles out of the 6547 initially detected publications were identified. Relevant medication-gene interactions were noted for drug safety. Interactions important for pain management were detected for (1) ibuprofen/; (2) celecoxib/; (3) piroxicam/, ; (4) diclofenac/, , , ; (5) meloxicam/; (6) aspirin/, , and ; (7) amitriptyline/ and ; (8) imipramine/; (9) nortriptyline/, , ; and (10) escitalopram/, , and .
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, a lack of well powered human in vivo studies assessing the pharmacogenetics in pain patients treated with NSAIDs or antidepressants is noted. Studies indicate a higher risk for partly severe side effects for the poor metabolizers and NSAIDs. Further in vivo studies are needed to consolidate the relevant polymorphisms in NSAID safety as well as in the efficacy of NSAIDs and antidepressants in pain management.
PubMed: 35745763
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14061190 -
Medicine Aug 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of low-dose aspirin combined with calcium supplements for the prevention of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of low-dose aspirin combined with calcium supplements for the prevention of preeclampsia.
METHODS
China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, Wanfang, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception until December 2022. Randomized controlled trials investigating the preventive use of aspirin in combination with calcium supplementation for preeclampsia in high-risk pregnant women were included. The quality of the literature was evaluated, and a meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software to analyze the clinical efficacy of low-dose aspirin combined with calcium supplementation in preventing preeclampsia.
RESULTS
Seven randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis, and compared with the control group, the experimental group had lower incidence rates of preeclampsia with gestational hypertension (odds ratios [OR]: 0.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.28), preeclampsia (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.10-0.37), gestational hypertension (OR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.07-0.31), preterm birth (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.16-0.44), postpartum hemorrhage (OR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.08-0.27), and fetal growth restriction (OR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.08-0.33).
CONCLUSION
Compared with aspirin alone, low-dose aspirin combined with calcium supplementation was more effective in preventing preeclampsia, reduced the risk of preterm birth and postpartum hemorrhage, and promoted fetal growth. This intervention has clinical value and should be considered for high-risk pregnant women.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Calcium; Pre-Eclampsia; Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced; Postpartum Hemorrhage; Premature Birth; Calcium, Dietary; Aspirin; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37653760
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034620 -
European Review For Medical and... Nov 2023Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is a common manifestation of cardiac arrhythmia, whose significance is heightened in the context of an aging global population... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is a common manifestation of cardiac arrhythmia, whose significance is heightened in the context of an aging global population and changing lifestyles, leading to an increased incidence. Stroke prevention in NVAF is a complex challenge that requires a comprehensive exploration of interventions. The emergence of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) is a potential treatment, necessitating a thorough evaluation of their safety and efficacy. As the quest for the best strategy for thrombotic risk in these patients continues, the interaction between DOAC and aspirin has become the focus of research.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
With a rigorous methodological approach, we conducted a thorough search of scientific databases up to August 2023. The methodology involved meticulous screening, careful data extraction, and rigorous assessment of trial quality, all conducted by two independent investigators. The results were synthesized through standardized mean differences, accompanied by 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
DOACs demonstrated significant enhancements in stroke prevention for NVAF, which was indicated by favorable outcomes in bleeding (RR = 4.04, 95% CI: 3.96, 4.12), coronary artery disease (RR = 2.45, 95% CI: 2.42, 2.48), mortality (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.56), myocardial infarction (RR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.81, 1.88), and stroke (RR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.47, 1.54). Notably, DOACs demonstrated optimal efficacy for NVAF patients with stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
DOACs may be potentially effective for preventing stroke after NVAF.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Aspirin; Warfarin; Stroke; Administration, Oral
PubMed: 38039031
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202311_34469 -
Journal of the American Geriatrics... Aug 2017To investigate whether low-dose aspirin (<300 mg/d) can influence the onset of cognitive impairment or dementia in observational studies and improve cognitive test... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To investigate whether low-dose aspirin (<300 mg/d) can influence the onset of cognitive impairment or dementia in observational studies and improve cognitive test scores in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in participants without dementia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Observational and interventional studies.
PARTICIPANTS
Individuals with no dementia or cognitive impairment initially.
MEASUREMENTS
Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for the maximum number of covariates from each study, were used to summarize data on the incidence of dementia and cognitive impairment in observational studies. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) were used for cognitive test scores in RCTs.
RESULTS
Of 2,341 potentially eligible articles, eight studies were included and provided data for 36,196 participants without dementia or cognitive impairment at baseline (mean age 66, 63% female). After adjusting for a median of three potential confounders over a median follow-up period of 6 years, chronic use of low-dose aspirin was not associated with onset of dementia or cognitive impairment (5 studies, N = 26,159; OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.55-1.22, P = .33, I = 67%). In three RCTs (N = 10,037; median follow-up 5 years), the use of low-dose aspirin was not associated with significantly better global cognition (SMD=0.005, 95% CI=-0.04-0.05, P = .84, I = 0%) in individuals without dementia. Adherence was lower in participants taking aspirin than in controls, and the incidence of adverse events was higher.
CONCLUSION
This review found no evidence that low-dose aspirin buffers against cognitive decline or dementia or improves cognitive test scores in RCTs.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Cognition; Cognition Disorders; Dementia; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28425093
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.14883 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber, the space between the cornea and iris, following significant injury to the eye. Hyphema may be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Traumatic hyphema is the entry of blood into the anterior chamber, the space between the cornea and iris, following significant injury to the eye. Hyphema may be associated with significant complications that uncommonly cause permanent vision loss. Complications include elevated intraocular pressure, corneal blood staining, anterior and posterior synechiae, and optic nerve atrophy. People with sickle cell trait or disease may be particularly susceptible to increases in intraocular pressure and optic atrophy. Rebleeding is associated with an increase in the rate and severity of complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of various medical interventions in the management of traumatic hyphema.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2022, Issue 3); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase.com; PubMed (1948 to March 2022); the ISRCTN registry; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The last date of the search was 22 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Two review authors independently assessed the titles and abstracts of all reports identified by the electronic and manual searches. We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials that compared various medical (non-surgical) interventions versus other medical interventions or control groups for the treatment of traumatic hyphema following closed-globe trauma. We applied no restrictions on age, gender, severity of the closed-globe trauma, or level of visual acuity at time of enrollment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 23 randomized and seven quasi-randomized studies with a total of 2969 participants. Interventions included antifibrinolytic agents (systemic and topical aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, and aminomethylbenzoic acid), corticosteroids (systemic and topical), cycloplegics, miotics, aspirin, conjugated estrogens, traditional Chinese medicine, monocular versus bilateral patching, elevation of the head, and bed rest. We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity for any intervention, whether measured within two weeks (short term) or for longer periods. In a meta-analysis of two trials, we found no evidence of an effect of aminocaproic acid on long-term visual acuity (RR 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.29) or final visual acuity measured up to three years after the hyphema (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18). Oral tranexamic acid appeared to provide little to no benefit on visual acuity in four trials (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.25). The remaining trials evaluated the effects of various interventions on short-term visual acuity; none of these interventions was measured in more than one trial. No intervention showed a statistically significant effect (RRs ranged from 0.75 to 1.10). Similarly, visual acuity measured for longer periods in four trials evaluating different interventions was also not statistically significant (RRs ranged from 0.82 to 1.02). The evidence supporting these findings was of low or very low certainty. Systemic aminocaproic acid reduced the rate of recurrent hemorrhage (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.60), as assessed in six trials with 330 participants. A sensitivity analysis omitting two studies not using an intention-to-treat analysis reduced the strength of the evidence (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.08). We obtained similar results for topical aminocaproic acid (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.10) in two trials with 131 participants. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as low. Systemic tranexamic acid had a significant effect in reducing the rate of secondary hemorrhage (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.53) in seven trials with 754 participants, as did aminomethylbenzoic acid (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.41), as reported in one study. Evidence to support an associated reduction in risk of complications from secondary hemorrhage (i.e. corneal blood staining, peripheral anterior synechiae, elevated intraocular pressure, and development of optic atrophy) by antifibrinolytics was limited by the small number of these events. Use of aminocaproic acid was associated with increased nausea, vomiting, and other adverse events compared with placebo. We found no evidence of an effect on the number of adverse events with the use of systemic versus topical aminocaproic acid or with standard versus lower drug dose. The number of days for the primary hyphema to resolve appeared to be longer with the use of systemic aminocaproic acid compared with no use, but this outcome was not altered by any other intervention. The available evidence on usage of systemic or topical corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or aspirin in traumatic hyphema was limited due to the small numbers of participants and events in the trials. We found no evidence of an effect between a single versus binocular patch on the risk of secondary hemorrhage or time to rebleed. We also found no evidence of an effect on the risk of secondary hemorrhage between ambulation and complete bed rest.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of an effect on visual acuity of any of the interventions evaluated in this review. Although the evidence was limited, people with traumatic hyphema who receive aminocaproic acid or tranexamic acid are less likely to experience secondary hemorrhage. However, hyphema took longer to clear in people treated with systemic aminocaproic acid. There is no good evidence to support the use of antifibrinolytic agents in the management of traumatic hyphema, other than possibly to reduce the rate of secondary hemorrhage. The potentially long-term deleterious effects of secondary hemorrhage are unknown. Similarly, there is no evidence to support the use of corticosteroids, cycloplegics, or non-drug interventions (such as patching, bed rest, or head elevation) in the management of traumatic hyphema. As these multiple interventions are rarely used in isolation, further research to assess the additive effect of these interventions might be of value.
Topics: Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Aminocaproic Acid; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Aspirin; Glaucoma; Hyphema; Mydriatics; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 36912744
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005431.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2020Intermittent claudication (IC) is a symptom of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Pentoxifylline, one of many drugs... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Intermittent claudication (IC) is a symptom of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Pentoxifylline, one of many drugs used to treat IC, acts by decreasing blood viscosity, improving erythrocyte flexibility, and promoting microcirculatory flow and tissue oxygen concentration. Many studies have evaluated the efficacy of pentoxifylline in treating people with PAD, but results of these studies are variable. This is the second update of a review first published in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of pentoxifylline in improving the walking capacity (i.e. pain-free walking distance and total (absolute, maximum) walking distance) of people with stable intermittent claudication, Fontaine stage II.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 28 January 2020. There were no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pentoxifylline versus placebo or any other pharmacological intervention in people with IC Fontaine stage II.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed the included studies, matched data and resolved disagreements by discussion. Review authors assessed the methodological quality of studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and collected results related to the outcomes of interest, pain-free walking distance (PFWD), total walking distance (TWD), ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI), quality of life (QoL) and side effects. Comparison of studies was based on duration and dose of pentoxifylline. We used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified no new eligible studies for this update. This review includes 24 studies with 3377 participants. Seventeen studies compared pentoxifylline versus placebo. The seven remaining studies compared pentoxifylline with flunarizine (one study), aspirin (one study), Gingko biloba extract (one study), nylidrin hydrochloride (one study), prostaglandin E1 (two studies), and buflomedil and nifedipine (one study). Risk of bias for the individual studies was generally unclear because there was a lack of methodological reporting for many of the included studies, especially regarding randomisation and allocation methods. Most included studies did not provide adequate information to allow selective reporting to be judged and did not report blinding of assessors. Heterogeneity between included studies was considerable with regards to multiple variables, including duration of treatment, dose of pentoxifylline, baseline walking distance and participant characteristics; therefore, pooled analysis for comparisons which included more than one study, was not possible. Pentoxifylline compared to placebo Of 17 studies comparing pentoxifylline with placebo, 11 reported PFWD and 14 reported TWD; the difference in percentage improvement in PFWD for pentoxifylline over placebo ranged from -33.8% to 73.9% and in TWD ranged from 1.2% to 155.9%. It was not possible to pool the data of the studies because data were insufficient and findings from individual trials were unclear. Most included studies suggested a possible improvement in PFWD and TWD for pentoxifylline over placebo (both low-certainty evidence). The five studies which evaluated pre-exercise ABI comparing pentoxifylline and placebo found no evidence of a difference (moderate-certainty evidence). Two of the three studies that evaluated QoL between people who received pentoxifylline and placebo were larger studies that used validated QoL tools and generally found no evidence of a difference between groups. One small, short-term study, which did not specify which QoL tool was used, reported improved QoL in the pentoxifylline group (moderate-certainty evidence). Pentoxifylline generally was well tolerated; the most commonly reported side effects consisted of gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea (low-certainty evidence). Certainty of the evidence from this review was low or moderate, with downgrading due to risk of bias concerns, inconsistencies between studies and the inability to evaluate imprecision because meta-analysis could not be undertaken. The seven remaining studies compared pentoxifylline with either flunarizine, aspirin, Gingko biloba extract, nylidrin hydrochloride, prostaglandin E1, or buflomedil and nifedipine; data were too limited to allow any meaningful conclusions to be made.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of high-certainty evidence for the effects of pentoxifylline compared to placebo, or other treatments, for IC. There is low-certainty evidence that pentoxifylline may improve PFWD and TWD compared to placebo, but no evidence of a benefit to ABI or QoL (moderate-certainty evidence). Pentoxifylline was reported to be generally well tolerated (low-certainty evidence). Given the large degree of heterogeneity between the studies, the role of pentoxifylline for people with IC Fontaine class II remains uncertain.
Topics: Ankle Brachial Index; Humans; Intermittent Claudication; Pentoxifylline; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasodilator Agents; Walking
PubMed: 33063850
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005262.pub4 -
Medicine Nov 2017Questions whether to continue or discontinue aspirin administration in the perioperative period of spinal surgery has not been systematically evaluated. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Questions whether to continue or discontinue aspirin administration in the perioperative period of spinal surgery has not been systematically evaluated.
OBJECTIVE
The present systematic review is carried out to assess the impact of continuing aspirin administration on the bleeding and cardiovascular events in perispinal surgery period.
METHODS
Studies were retrieved through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Springer Link Databases (search terms, aspirin, continue or discontinue, and spinal fusion), bibliographies of the articles retrieved, and the authors' reference files. We included studies that enrolled patients who underwent spinal surgery who were anticoagulated with aspirin alone and that reported bleeding or cardiovascular events as an outcome. Study quality was assessed using a validated form. 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was pooled to give summary estimates of bleeding and cardiovascular risk.
RESULTS
We identified 4 studies assessing bleeding risk associated with aspirin continuation or cardiovascular risk with aspirin discontinuation during spinal surgery. The continuation of aspirin will not increase the risk of blood loss during the spinal surgery (95% CI, -111.72 to -0.59; P = .05). Also, there was no observed increase in the operative time (95% CI, -33.29 to -3.89; P = .01) and postoperative blood transfusion (95% CI, 0.00-0.27; P = .05). But as for the cardiovascular risk without aspirin continuation and mean hospital length of stay with aspirin continuation, we did not get enough samples to make an accurate decision about their relations with aspirin.
CONCLUSION
Patients undergoing spinal surgery with continued aspirin administration do not have an increased risk for bleeding. In addition, there is no observed increase in the operation time and postoperative blood transfusion.
Topics: Aspirin; Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Risk Factors; Spine
PubMed: 29145278
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008603