Fook-Hong Ng

High incidence of clopidogrel-associated gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with previous peptic ulcer disease

Background:  In average‐risk patients, the new anti‐platelet agent, clopidogrel, causes less upper gastrointestinal adverse events than aspirin. However, there are no safety data on the use of clopidogrel in high‐risk patients.

Gastrointestinal bleeding in patients receiving a combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and enoxaparin in acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND:The combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and enoxaparin (combination therapy) is the standard treatment for acute coronary syndrome but is associated with gastrointestinal bleeding. However, information in this area is scarce.AIM:This retrospective study aimed to determine the incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a real-life situation. The effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment was also analyzed.METHOD:From January 2002 to December 2006, all patients receiving combination therapy were analyzed. The end point was the occurrence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding during combination therapy or within 7 days of stopping enoxaparin.RESULTS:The patient group consisted of 666 patients (age 72.1 ± 12.6 yr). Gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 18 (2.7%) patients. The overall hospital mortality was 4.1% (27 patients). A cardiac event was the major cause (N = 24, 3.6%). Only one patient died of massive gastrointestinal bleeding (0.15%). Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that previous peptic ulcer, cardiogenic shock, and the lack of PPI coprescription were significant risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding. The age-adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for gastrointestinal bleeding was 5.07 (1.31–16.58) for previous peptic ulcer, 21.41 (2.56–146.68) for cardiogenic shock, and 0.068 (0.010–0.272) for the coprescription with a PPI.CONCLUSION:In real life, the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding associated with the combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and enoxaparin therapy was estimated to be 2.7%. Previous peptic ulcer disease or cardiogenic shock were significant independent risk factors. Coprescription with a PPI can significantly reduce the risk.

Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Aspirin and Clopidogrel Co-Therapy

Introduction: The major complication of aspirin and clopidogrel (A+C) co-therapy is upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, data are unavailable for real-life situations. Furthermore, the treatment effect of antisecretory agents is unknown. Aim: This cohort study aimed to determine the occurrence of UGIB. The treatment effect of H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) was also analyzed. Method: The records of 987 consecutive patients on A+C co-therapy between January 2001 and September 2006 were analyzed. The follow-up ended on the dates of a first occurrence of UGIB, stopping A+C co-therapy, a change in the antisecretory class, death, or March 2007. Results: After a follow-up of 5.8 ± 6.5 months, UGIB occurred in 39 (4.0%) patients. PPI, H2RA and control were prescribed in 213, 287 and 487 patients respectively. After adjustment for age, dose of aspirin, previous UGIB and duration of treatment, the risk was marginally reduced by H2RA (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.18–0.91, p = 0.04) and significantly reduced by PPI (OR = 0.04, 95% CI 0.002–0.21, p = 0.002), as compared to control. Conclusion: The occurrence of UGIB associated with A+C co-therapy for a median of 5.8 months was 4.0%. Co-prescription with PPI was associated with a lower risk.

Clopidogrel plus omeprazole compared with aspirin plus omeprazole for aspirin-induced symptomatic peptic ulcers/erosions with low to moderate bleeding/re-bleeding risk: a single-blind, randomized controlled study

Background : Clopidogrel causes significantly less symptomatic peptic ulcer disease and gastrointestinal bleeding than low‐dose aspirin in average‐risk patients. The gastrotoxicity of clopidogrel in patients with active peptic ulcer disease is unknown.

Cytomegalovirus colitis in individuals without apparent cause of immunodeficiency.

Cytomegalovirus infection is usually reported inimmunocompromised patients. In this study, apparentlyimmunocompetent patients with cytomegaloviral colitiswere reviewed. Records with a diagnosis ofcytomegaloviral colitis from January 1989 to June 1996 wereretrieved for analysis. Ten patients were included(median age 70 yr). The major presenting symptoms werediarrhea and hematochezia. Ulceration was the mainmacroscopic finding. Rectal bleeding was mostlyself-limiting. Three patients developed localcomplications (rectovaginal fistula in two; rectalstricture in one). In the two patients with rectovaginalfistula, lymphocytes subsets and proliferative response wereentirely normal. In the other patient, low B lymphocytecount and low response to mitogen were demonstrated.However, the immunoglobulins were not suppressed and rectal biopsies revealed noncaseatinggranulomas, suggesting activated cell-mediated immunity.In conclusion, a high index of suspicion is crucial forearly diagnosis of cytomegaloviral colitis in patients with bloody diarrhea, even though obviousevidence of immunodeficiency is lacking.

Esomeprazole compared with famotidine in the prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome or myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES:Little is known about the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors compared with H2 receptor antagonists in preventing adverse upper gastrointestinal complications in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) receiving aspirin, clopidogrel, and enoxaparin or thrombolytics. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacies of esomeprazole and famotidine in preventing gastrointestinal complications.METHODS:A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was performed in patients receiving a combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and either enoxaparin or thrombolytics. Patients received either esomeprazole (20 mg nocte) or famotidine (40 mg nocte) orally for 4–52 weeks, depending on the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy. The primary end point was upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), perforation, or obstruction from ulcer/erosion (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00683111).RESULTS:In all, 311 patients were recruited, with 163 and 148 patients in the esomeprazole and famotidine groups, respectively. Mean (s.d.) follow-up was 19.2 (17.6) and 17.6 (18.0) weeks, respectively. One (0.6%) patient in the esomeprazole group and 9 (6.1%) in the famotidine group reached the primary end point (log-rank test, P=0.0052, hazard ratio=0.095, 95% confidence interval: 0.005–0.504); all had upper GIB.CONCLUSIONS:In patients with ACS or STEMI, esomeprazole is superior to famotidine in preventing upper gastrointestinal complications related to aspirin, clopidogrel, and enoxaparin or thrombolytics.

Chronic hepatitis C genotype 6 responds better to pegylated interferon and ribavirin combination therapy than genotype 1

Background and Aims:  Chronic hepatitis C genotype 6 is common in Hong Kong, especially among i.v. drug abusers. Responses of these patients to combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin treatment were inconsistent and the numbers of patients involved in previous studies were small. We performed a retrospective study to compare the therapeutic responses of this regimen in patients infected with genotype 6 and genotype 1.

Effect of amlodipine on platelet inhibition by clopidogrel in patients with ischaemic heart disease: a randomised, controlled trial

Background Amlodipine inhibits cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme and has the potential to reduce clopidogrel bioactivation in vivo. Reports in previous retrospective studies described greater platelet reactivity in patients on amlodipine. Objective To evaluate the treatment effect of clopidogrel in patients on amlodipine versus not on calcium-channel blockers (CCBs). Design and setting Randomised, controlled, open-label trial conducted in a regional acute hospital. Patients and interventions 98 patients on clopidogrel for ischaemic heart disease were recruited consecutively and randomised to take either amlodipine or drugs with inert CYP effects as controls. The P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) was measured using whole blood obtained at baseline and on day 28. Main outcome measures The primary analysis involved the PRU values on day 28. The secondary analyses were percentage of platelet inhibition and poor response to clopidogrel as defined by PRU>235. Results Both groups experienced comparable day 28 PRUs (amlodipine 227±84 vs control 214±90; mean difference 12.7, 95% CI −22 to +47). Percentage of platelet inhibition (amlodipine 33% vs control 38%, mean difference −4.5%, 95% CI −14% to +5%) and those with poor response on day 28 (amlodipine 49% vs control 45%; p=0.76) did not differ significantly. Conclusions Concomitant amlodipine has no negative impact on clopidogrel-mediated platelet inhibition in patients with ischaemic heart disease.

Sequential intravenous/oral antibiotic vs. continuous intravenous antibiotic in the treatment of pyogenic liver abscess.

Aim : Pyogenic liver abscesses result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Antimicrobial regimens using sequential intravenous/oral therapy may reduce the length of hospital stay. In this retrospective analysis, the efficacy of continuous intravenous antibiotic therapy (group I) vs. sequential intravenous/oral antibiotic therapy (group II) was studied in patients with pyogenic liver abscess.

Effect of esomeprazole versus famotidine on platelet inhibition by clopidogrel: A double-blind, randomized trial

BACKGROUND Previous studies showed that esomeprazole does not interfere significantly with the platelet inhibitory effect of clopidogrel. It is unknown whether famotidine, a histamine 2 receptor antagonist, interacts with clopidogrel. This double-blind, randomized study aimed to compare the influence of esomeprazole and famotidine on the platelet inhibitory effect of clopidogrel. METHODS Patients with acute coronary syndrome or elective percutaneous coronary interventions treated with aspirin and clopidogrel cotherapy were randomized to receive esomeprazole 20 mg daily or famotidine 40 mg daily. Platelet reactivity units (PRUs) were measured at baseline and on day 28. The primary analysis involved the PRU values on day 28. RESULTS There were 44 patients in the esomeprazole group and 44 in the famotidine group. The baseline PRUs of the 2 groups were comparable (esomeprazole vs famotidine, 229.1 ± 85.6 vs 220.4 ± 83.0, P = .63). The PRUs on day 28 were 242.6 ± 89.7 and 237.5 ± 79.2 in the groups receiving esomeprazole and famotidine, respectively (mean difference 5.1, 95% CI -30.8 to 41.0, P = .78). CONCLUSIONS The platelet inhibitory effect of clopidogrel was not significantly different between patients receiving esomeprazole and those receiving famotidine. Neither esomeprazole nor famotidine reduced the platelet inhibitory effect of clopidogrel. (Clinicaltrial.gov Identifier NCT01062516).