-
The American Journal of Cardiology May 1991Dipyridamole cardiac imaging is a useful alternative to exercise stress testing in the evaluation of patients with ischemic heart disease. Intravenous dipyridamole has... (Review)
Review
Dipyridamole cardiac imaging is a useful alternative to exercise stress testing in the evaluation of patients with ischemic heart disease. Intravenous dipyridamole has been approved recently for clinical use. Oral dipyridamole is widely available. The hemodynamic effects of dipyridamole include an increase in coronary blood flow in excess of the increase in myocardial oxygen consumption and cardiac output. The quality of the thallium images is better or similar to that of exercise thallium images. The optimal dose of intravenous dipyridamole is 0.56 mg/kg and the optimal oral dose is 300-375 mg, although higher doses may be necessary in some patients. The sensitivity and specificity of dipyridamole-thallium imaging, whether intravenous or oral, have been shown in a number of studies to be quite adequate and comparable to that achieved during exercise thallium imaging. Dipyridamole-thallium imaging has also been useful in identifying high-risk patients undergoing major elective vascular surgery. The relative merits of dipyridamole imaging versus exercise testing after acute myocardial infarction require further studies.
Topics: Coronary Vessels; Dipyridamole; Exercise Test; Heart; Hemodynamics; Humans; Radionuclide Imaging; Thallium Radioisotopes; Vasodilation
PubMed: 2035431
DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9149(05)80004-9 -
British Journal of Pharmacology Jan 2006
Review
Topics: Animals; Aspirin; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dipyridamole; Humans; Platelet Aggregation; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Platelet Function Tests; Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex; Pyridines; Thrombosis
PubMed: 16402110
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706401 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2013Patients with prosthetic heart valves are at increased risk for valve thrombosis and arterial thromboembolism. Oral anticoagulation alone, or the addition of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with prosthetic heart valves are at increased risk for valve thrombosis and arterial thromboembolism. Oral anticoagulation alone, or the addition of antiplatelet drugs, has been used to minimise this risk. An important issue is the effectiveness and safety of the latter strategy.
OBJECTIVES
This is an update of our previous review; the goal was to create a valid synthesis of all available, methodologically sound data to further assess the safety and efficacy of combined oral anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy versus oral anticoagulant monotherapy in patients with prosthetic heart valves.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated the previous searches from 2003 and 2010 on 16 January 2013 and searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library (2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (OVID, 1946 to January Week 1 2013), and EMBASE (OVID, 1980 to 2013 Week 02). We have also looked at reference lists of individual reports, review articles, meta-analyses, and consensus statements. We included reports published in any language or in abstract form.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All reports of randomised controlled trials comparing standard-dose oral anticoagulation to standard-dose oral anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy in patients with one or more prosthetic heart valves.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed the search strategy, assessed trials for inclusion and study quality, and extracted data. We collected adverse effects information from the trials.
MAIN RESULTS
One new study has been identified and included in this update. In total, 13 studies involving 4122 participants were included in this review update. Years of publication ranged from 1971 to 2011. Compared with anticoagulation alone, the addition of an antiplatelet agent reduced the risk of thromboembolic events (odds ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.59; P < 0.00001) and total mortality (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.78; P = 0.0004). Aspirin and dipyridamole reduced these events similarly. The risk of major bleeding was increased when antiplatelet agents were added to oral anticoagulants (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.18; P = 0.006).For major bleeding, there was no evidence of heterogeneity between aspirin and dipyridamole and in the comparison of trials performed before and after 1990, around the time when anticoagulation standardisation with the international normalised ratio was being implemented. A lower daily dose of aspirin (< 100 mg) may be associated with a lower major bleeding risk than higher doses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Adding antiplatelet therapy, either dipyridamole or low-dose aspirin, to oral anticoagulation decreases the risk of systemic embolism or death among patients with prosthetic heart valves. The risk of major bleeding is increased with antiplatelet therapy. These results apply to patients with mechanical prosthetic valves or those with biological valves and indicators of high risk such as atrial fibrillation or prior thromboembolic events. The effectiveness and safety of low-dose aspirin (100 mg daily) appears to be similar to higher-dose aspirin and dipyridamole. In general, the quality of the included trials tended to be low, possibly reflecting the era when the majority of the trials were conducted (1970s and 1980s when trial methodology was less advanced).
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anticoagulants; Aspirin; Dipyridamole; Drug Therapy, Combination; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Hemorrhage; Humans; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 23839768
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003464.pub2 -
Health Technology Assessment... Oct 2004To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two alternative antiplatelet agents, clopidogrel and modified-release (MR)-dipyridamole, relative to... (Review)
Review
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel and modified-release dipyridamole in the secondary prevention of occlusive vascular events: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two alternative antiplatelet agents, clopidogrel and modified-release (MR)-dipyridamole, relative to prophylactic doses of aspirin for the secondary prevention of occlusive vascular events.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases.
REVIEW METHODS
A total of 2906 titles and abstracts were rigorously screened and 441 studies were assessed in detail. Two RCTs were identified. For the assessment of cost-effectiveness, eight reviews were identified. The results were presented in structured tables and as a narrative summary. No additional clinical effectiveness data were presented in either of two company submissions. All economic evaluations (including accompanying models) included in the company submissions were assessed. Following this analysis, if the existing models (company or published) were not sufficient, a de novo model or modified versions of the models were developed.
RESULTS
In the CAPRIE trial the point estimate for the primary outcome, i.e. ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or vascular death, favoured clopidogrel over aspirin, but the boundaries of the confidence intervals raise the possibility that clopidogrel is not more beneficial than aspirin. In terms of the secondary outcomes reported, there was a non-significant trend in favour of clopidogrel over aspirin but the boundaries of the confidence intervals on the relative risks all crossed unity. There was no difference in the number of patients ever reporting any bleeding disorder in the clopidogrel group compared with the aspirin group. The incidences of rash and diarrhoea were statistically significantly higher in the clopidogrel group than the aspirin group. Patients in the aspirin group had a higher incidence of indigestion/nausea/vomiting than patients in the clopidogrel group. Haematological adverse events were rare in both the clopidogrel and aspirin groups. No cases of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura were reported in either group. Treatment with MR-dipyridamole alone did not significantly reduce the risk of any of the primary outcomes reported in ESPS-2 compared with treatment with aspirin. ASA-MR-dipyridamole was significantly more effective than aspirin alone in patients with stroke or transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) at reducing the outcome of stroke and marginally more effective at reducing stroke and/or death. Treatment with ASA-MR-dipyridamole did not statistically significantly reduce the risk of death compared to treatment with aspirin. The number of strokes was statistically significantly reduced in the ASA-MR-dipyridamole group compared with the MR-dipyridamole group. In terms of the other primary outcomes, stroke and/or death and death, the results favoured treatment with ASA-MR-dipyridamole but the findings were not statistically significant. There was no difference in the number of bleeding complications between the ASA-MR-dipyridamole and aspirin groups. The incidence of bleeding complications was significantly lower in the MR-dipyridamole treatment group. More patients in the MR-dipyridamole treatment groups experienced headaches compared to patients receiving treatment with aspirin alone. The York model assessed the cost-effectiveness of differing combinations of treatment strategies in four patient subgroups, under a number of different scenarios. The results of the model were sensitive to the assumptions made in the alternative scenarios, in particular the impact of therapy on non-vascular deaths.
CONCLUSIONS
Clopidogrel was marginally more effective than aspirin at reducing the risk of ischaemic stroke, MI or vascular death in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease, however, it did not statistically significantly reduce the risk of vascular death or death from any cause compared with aspirin. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of bleeding complications experienced in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups. MR-dipyridamole in combination with aspirin was superior to aspirin alone at reducing the risk of stroke and marginally more effective at reducing the risk of stroke and/or death. Compared with treatment with MR-dipyridamole alone, MR-dipyridamole in combination with aspirin significantly reduced the risk of stroke. Treatment with MR-dipyridamole in combination with aspirin did not statistically significantly reduce the risk of death compared with aspirin. Compared with treatment with MR-dipyridamole alone, bleeding complications were statistically significantly higher in patients treated with aspirin and MR-dipyridamole in combination with aspirin. Due to the assumptions that have to be made, no conclusions could be drawn about the relative effectiveness of MR-dipyridamole, alone or in combination with aspirin, and clopidogrel from the adjusted indirect comparison. The following would apply for a cost of up to GBP20,000-40,000 per additional quality-adjusted life-year. For the stroke and TIA subgroups, ASA-MR-dipyridamole would be the most cost-effective therapy given a 2-year treatment duration as long as all patients were not left disabled by their initial (qualifying) stroke. For a lifetime treatment duration, ASA-MR-dipyridamole would be considered more cost-effective than aspirin as long as treatment effects on non-vascular deaths are not considered and all patients were not left disabled by their initial stroke. In patients left disabled by their initial stroke, aspirin is the most cost-effective therapy. Clopidogrel and MR-dipyridamole alone would not be considered cost-effective under any scenario. For the MI and peripheral arterial disease subgroups, clopidogrel would be considered cost-effective for a treatment duration of 2 years. For a lifetime treatment duration, clopidogrel would be considered more cost-effective than aspirin as long as treatment effects on non-vascular deaths are not considered. It is suggested that the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin should be evaluated for the secondary prevention of occlusive vascular events. Also randomised, direct comparisons of clopidogrel and MR-dipyridamole in combination with aspirin are required to inform the treatment of patients with a history of stroke and TIA, plus trials that compare treatment with clopidogrel and MR-dipyridamole for the secondary prevention of vascular events in patients who demonstrate a genuine intolerance to aspirin.
Topics: Aspirin; Clopidogrel; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Delayed-Action Preparations; Diarrhea; Dipyridamole; Drug Costs; Drug Eruptions; Dyspepsia; Evidence-Based Medicine; Hemorrhage; Humans; Ischemia; Models, Econometric; Nausea; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Research Design; Risk Factors; Ticlopidine; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Diseases; Vomiting
PubMed: 15461876
DOI: 10.3310/hta8380 -
Health Technology Assessment... Sep 2011Occlusive vascular events such as myocardial infarction (MI), ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) are the result of a reduction in blood flow... (Review)
Review
Clopidogrel and modified-release dipyridamole for the prevention of occlusive vascular events (review of Technology Appraisal No. 90): a systematic review and economic analysis.
BACKGROUND
Occlusive vascular events such as myocardial infarction (MI), ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) are the result of a reduction in blood flow associated with an artery becoming narrow or blocked through atherosclerosis and atherothrombosis. Peripheral arterial disease is the result of narrowing of the arteries that supply blood to the muscles and other tissues, usually in the lower extremities. The primary objective in the treatment of all patients with a history of occlusive vascular events and peripheral arterial disease is to prevent the occurrence of new occlusive vascular events.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel and modified-release dipyridamole (MRD) alone or with aspirin (ASA) compared with ASA (and each other where appropriate) in the prevention of occlusive vascular events in patients with a history of MI, ischaemic stroke/TIA or established peripheral arterial disease. To consider the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in patients with multivascular disease. This review is an update of the evidence base for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance Technology Appraisal No. 90 (TA90) entitled Clopidogrel and modified-release dipyridamole for the prevention of occlusive vascular events (2005).
DATA SOURCES
Four electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library) were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and economic evaluations. Submissions to NICE by the manufacturers of the interventions were also considered.
REVIEW METHODS
A systematic review of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness was conducted. To manage heterogeneity between trials, indirect analysis (using a mixed-treatment methodology) was performed on selected clinical outcomes. A new economic model was developed to assess incremental costs per life-year gained [quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)].
RESULTS
For evidence of clinical effectiveness, four RCTs were identified: CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events), ESPRIT (European/Australasian Stroke Prevention in Reversible Ischaemia Trial), PRoFESS (Prevention Regimen For Effectively avoiding Second Strokes) and ESPS-2 (Second European Stroke Prevention Study). In CAPRIE (patients with MI, ischaemic stroke or peripheral arterial disease), statistically significant outcomes in favour of clopidogrel were noted for the primary outcome (first occurrence of ischaemic stroke, MI or vascular death) compared with ASA [relative risk reduction 8.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3% to 16.5%; p = 0.043]. In ESPRIT (patients with ischaemic stroke/TIA) for the primary outcome (first occurrence of death from all vascular causes, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal MI or major bleeding complication), the risk of event occurrence was statistically significantly lower in the MRD + ASA arm than in the ASA arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98], with no statistically significant difference in bleeding events between the two arms. In PRoFESS (patients with ischaemic stroke) the rate of recurrent stroke of any type (primary outcome) was similar in the MRD + ASA and clopidogrel groups, and the null hypothesis (that MRD + ASA was inferior to clopidogrel) could not be rejected. In ESPS-2 (patients with ischaemic stroke/TIA), on the primary outcome of stroke, statistically significant differences in favour of MRD + ASA were observed compared with ASA and MRD alone (relative risk 0.76; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.93). The outcomes addressed in the mixed-treatment comparisons (limited by the available data) for the ischaemic stroke/TIA population confirmed the results of the direct comparisons. The 11 economic evaluations included in the review of cost-effectiveness indicated that for patients with previous peripheral arterial disease, ischaemic stroke or MI, clopidogrel is cost-effective compared with ASA, and for patients with previous ischaemic stroke/TIA, treatment with MRD + ASA is cost-effective compared with any other treatment in patients in the secondary prevention of occlusive vascular events. The relevance of the review was limited as the economic evaluations were not based on the most current clinical data. Cost-effectiveness results generated from the Assessment Group's de novo economic model suggested that the most cost-effective approach for patients with ischaemic stroke/TIA is clopidogrel followed by MRD + ASA then ASA. For patients with MI, the most cost-effective approach is ASA followed by clopidogrel. For patients with established peripheral arterial disease, the most cost-effective approach is clopidogrel followed by ASA. For patients with multivascular disease, clopidogrel followed by ASA is the most cost-effective approach. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were also calculated for patients who are intolerant to ASA. Assuming that the branded price for clopidogrel is used and TA90 guidance is not applied, all of the ICERs range between £2189 and £13,558 per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were fully consistent with these findings.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests that the most cost-effective treatment for patients with ischaemic stroke/TIA is clopidogrel followed by MRD + ASA followed by ASA; for patients with MI, ASA followed by clopidogrel; and for patients with established peripheral arterial disease or multivascular disease, clopidogrel followed by ASA.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Aspirin; Brain Ischemia; Clopidogrel; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Delayed-Action Preparations; Dipyridamole; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Models, Economic; Myocardial Infarction; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ticlopidine
PubMed: 21888837
DOI: 10.3310/hta15310 -
Clinical Cardiology Mar 1990We have reviewed some of the voluminous literature on the effects of aspirin combined with dipyridamole on coronary thrombosis. There is clear evidence that aspirin is... (Review)
Review
We have reviewed some of the voluminous literature on the effects of aspirin combined with dipyridamole on coronary thrombosis. There is clear evidence that aspirin is partially effective in preventing platelet aggregation and subsequent thrombosis in experimental constricted and damaged coronary arteries of dogs. Clinical studies show a clear reduction in myocardial infarction in male human subjects who are given aspirin as therapy for unstable angina, or as prophylaxis in asymptomatic individuals. In many studies aspirin and dipyridamole have been combined and are effective. We have not found dipyridamole to be effective in the dog with coronary artery constriction and find no substantial evidence that it is effective in preventing myocardial infarction in man. Until definitive studies show that combining dipyridamole with aspirin is more effective than aspirin alone, we do not recommend its use for prevention of coronary thrombosis.
Topics: Animals; Aspirin; Coronary Disease; Coronary Thrombosis; Dipyridamole; Dogs; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans
PubMed: 2182246
DOI: 10.1002/clc.4960130304 -
Journal of the Neurological Sciences Oct 2022Data are limited on the ability of dipyridamole to additionally inhibit platelet function/reactivity in ischaemic cerebrovascular disease (CVD) patients on aspirin. (Observational Study)
Observational Study
Assessment of on-treatment platelet reactivity at high and low shear stress and platelet activation status after the addition of dipyridamole to aspirin in the early and late phases after TIA and ischaemic stroke.
BACKGROUND
Data are limited on the ability of dipyridamole to additionally inhibit platelet function/reactivity in ischaemic cerebrovascular disease (CVD) patients on aspirin.
AIMS
To assess inhibition of platelet function/reactivity and platelet activation with dipyridamole in CVD.
METHODS
This prospective, observational study assessed TIA/ischaemic stroke patients before (baseline; N = 60), at 14 ±7 days (14d, N = 39) and ≥ 90 days (90d, N = 31) after adding dipyridamole to aspirin. Platelet function/reactivity at high shear stress (PFA-100® C-ADP) and low shear stress (VerifyNow® P2Y12 and Multiplate® ADP assays), and platelet activation status (% expression of CD62P, CD63 and leucocyte-platelet complexes on whole blood flow cytometry) were quantified. 'Dipyridamole-high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR)' was defined as failure to inhibit ADP-induced platelet aggregation +/- adhesion compared with the patient's baseline on aspirin monotherapy by more than twice the coefficient-of-variation of the assay after adding dipyridamole to aspirin.
RESULTS
Dipyridamole-HTPR was identified in 71.4-75% of patients on PFA-100 C-ADP, 83.9-86.8% of patients on VerifyNow P2Y12, and 81.5-83.3% of patients on Multiplate ADP assays. There were no changes in CD62P/CD63 expression (P ≥ 0.18), or consistent changes in leucocyte-platelet complexes in CVD patients overall at 14d or 90d vs. baseline after commencing dipyridamole. Monocyte-platelet complexes increased in the patient subgroup with dipyridamole-HTPR at 14d and 90d on PFA-100, and at 14d on VerifyNow (P ≤ 0.04), but not in those without dipyridamole-HTPR.
DISCUSSION
Additional antiplatelet effects of dipyridamole are detectable under high and low shear stress conditions with user-friendly platelet function/reactivity tests ex vivo. Increasing circulating monocyte-platelet complexes over time are associated with dipyridamole-HTPR.
Topics: Adenosine Diphosphate; Aspirin; Blood Platelets; Brain Ischemia; Dipyridamole; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Ischemic Stroke; Platelet Activation; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Prospective Studies; Stroke
PubMed: 36030623
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2022.120334 -
Annals of the New York Academy of... Oct 2010Chronic and intermittent ischemic vascular disorders represent a burgeoning clinical challenge. Previous studies have focused on the idea that therapeutic angiogenesis... (Review)
Review
Chronic and intermittent ischemic vascular disorders represent a burgeoning clinical challenge. Previous studies have focused on the idea that therapeutic angiogenesis strategies could alleviate tissue ischemia; however, it is now appreciated that vascular disease is not simply limited to vascular wall cells but also influenced by simultaneously occurring inflammatory responses. Our laboratory has discovered that pharmacological treatment of permanent tissue ischemia with dipyridamole significantly augments ischemic tissue reperfusion, angiogenesis, and arteriogenesis over time. We have found that the beneficial effects of dipyridamole therapy are due to its ability to increase tissue nitric oxide bioavailability that corrects tissue redox imbalance. Importantly, we have also discovered that dipyridamole treatment invoking nitric oxide (NO) production significantly downregulates various innate immune response genes during chronic ischemic tissue injury. These findings demonstrate that dipyridamole-induced production of nitrite/NO significantly decreases inflammatory responses while increasing vascular growth in ischemic tissues.
Topics: Animals; Dipyridamole; Down-Regulation; Humans; Immunity, Innate; Inflammation; Ischemia; Neovascularization, Physiologic; Nitric Oxide; Nitrites; Reperfusion
PubMed: 20955430
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05737.x -
Scientific Reports Jul 2020While the patency of vascular access is essential for hemodialysis patients, optimal pharmaceutical treatment to maintain arteriovenous fistula (AVF) patency remains...
While the patency of vascular access is essential for hemodialysis patients, optimal pharmaceutical treatment to maintain arteriovenous fistula (AVF) patency remains lacking. As cardiovascular diseases are highly prevalent in patients with end-stage renal disease, various cardiovascular medications have also been used to maintain AVF patency. However, previous studies revealed inconsistent therapeutic effects and a comprehensive evaluation of this issue is needed. The present retrospective, longitudinal cohort study included patients receiving successful AVF creation. The evaluated cardiovascular medications included antiplatelet agents, antihypertensive agents, nitrates and nitrites, statins, dipyridamole, and pentoxifylline. The outcome was AVF primary patency. All laboratory data and medication profiles were recorded at baseline and followed at 3-month interval, until the end of the 2-year study period. Cox proportional regression model with time-dependent covariates was used to evaluate the risk for AVF patency loss. A total of 349 patients were included in the present study, in which 57% were men and the mean age was 65 ± 14 years. Among the included patients, 40% used antiplatelet agents, 27% used dipyridamole and 36% used statins at baseline. Of all the evaluated cardiovascular medications, only dipyridamole showed significant association with a higher risk for loss of AVF patency. To evaluate the effect of combination of antiplatelet agents and dipyridamole, the patients were classified into four groups, I: combine use of antiplatelet agents and dipyridamole, II: antiplatelet only, III: dipyridamole only; IV: none of both were used. Of the four groups, group IV exhibited highest AVF patency (52.4%), which was followed by group III (42.7%), group II (40%), and group I (28.6%), respectively. Compared with group IV, only group I showed a significantly higher risk for AVF patency loss. None of the cardiovascular medications evaluated in the present study showed a beneficial effect on AVF patency. Furthermore, dipyridamole showed an association with a higher risk of AVF patency loss. We do not suggest a beneficial effect of dipyridamole on maintaining AVF patency, particularly in combination with antiplatelet agents.
Topics: Aged; Arteriovenous Fistula; Coronary Artery Disease; Dipyridamole; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Longitudinal Studies; Male; Middle Aged; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Proportional Hazards Models; Renal Dialysis; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Vascular Patency
PubMed: 32699337
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-69019-6 -
Canadian Medical Association Journal Feb 1973
Topics: Aspirin; Blood Platelets; Dipyridamole; Humans; Sulfinpyrazone; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 4687370
DOI: No ID Found