Introduction: Lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is a serious cardiovascular disease. People living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at risk. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of L...Introduction: Lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is a serious cardiovascular disease. People living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at risk. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of LEAD and identify the associated factors among people living with HIV who were followed at the departmental university hospital Ouémé-Plateau in Benin. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. It included all HIV-infected people who were monitored at the department of medicine of the target hospital during the study period and met the inclusion criteria (followed for at least three months, aged at least 25 years, and having given their written consent to participate). Data were collected during an individual interview, followed by the measurement of parameters. The ankle brachial index ≤ 0.9 was used for the diagnosis of LEAD. Associated factors were searched through a multivariable logistic regression. Results: The prevalence of LEAD was 34.2% among 222 respondents having a mean age was 42.9 ± 10.8 years and a female predominance (77.5%). No significant association was found between the presence of LEAD and sociodemographic factors. The presence of LEAD was significantly associated with hypertension and antiretroviral therapy. Hypertensive patients had a higher risk of LEAD compared to non-hypertensive patients (OR = 1.98, 95% CI [1.04-3.83], p = 0.037). Those who were receiving second-line therapy also had a higher risk of LEAD compared to those on first-line therapy (OR = 2.95, 95% CI [1.14-7.60], p = 0.025). Conclusion: This study showed a high prevalence of LEAD especially among hypertensive patients and those who were receiving second-line antiretroviral therapy. LEAD diagnosis and management should be included in the routine care of people living with HIV in Benin.展开更多
Background There is great debate on the possible adverse interaction between proton pump inhibitors （PPIs） and clopidogrel. In ad- dition, whether the use of PPIs affects the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor remains ...Background There is great debate on the possible adverse interaction between proton pump inhibitors （PPIs） and clopidogrel. In ad- dition, whether the use of PPIs affects the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor remains less known. We aimed to determine the impact of concomi- tant administration of PPIs and clopidogrel or ticagrelor on clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome （ACS） after percuta- neous coronary intervention （PCI）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data fi＇om a ＂real world＂, international, multi-center registry between 2003 and 2014 （n = 15,401） and assessed the impact of concomitant administration of PPIs and clopidogrel or ticagrelor on 1-year composite primary endpoint （all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding） in patients with ACS after PCI. Results Of 9429 patients in the final cohort, 54.8% （n = 5165） was prescribed a PPI at discharge. Patients receiving a PPI were older, more often female, and were more likely to have comorbidities. No association was observed between PPI use and the primary endpoint for patients receiving clopidogrel （ad- justed HR： 1.036; 95% CI： 0.903-1.189） or ticagrelor （adjusted HR： 2.320; 95% CI： 0.875-45.151） （Pinteraction = 0.2004）. Similarly, use of a PPI was not associated with increased risk of all-cause death, re-infarction, or a decreased risk of severe bleeding for patients treated with either clopidogrel or ticagrelor. Conclusions In patients with ACS following PCI, concomitant use of PPIs was not associated with in- creased risk of adverse outcomes in patients receiving either clopidogrel or ticagrelor. Our findings indicate it is reasonable to use a PPI in combination with clopidogrel or ticagrelor, especially in patients with a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding.展开更多
Objective The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients on oral anticoagulation （OAC） after acute coronary syndrome （ACS） and percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） remains debated. This study sought to eval...Objective The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients on oral anticoagulation （OAC） after acute coronary syndrome （ACS） and percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） remains debated. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OAC plus clopidogrel with or without aspirin in a real-world setting. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data from an international, multi-center registry be- tween 2003 and 2014 （n = 15,401）. Patients with ACS and receiving OAC after PCI were screened. The composite primary endpoint was 1-year all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding. Results The final analysis enrolled 642 patients including 62 patients （9.7%） with OAC and clopidogrel （dual therapy）, and 580 patients （90.3%） with the combination of aspirin, OAC and clopidogrel （triple therapy）. Pa- tients on triple therapy were more often female and were more likely to have comorbidities. There was no significant difference regarding the primary end point between dual therapy with triple therapy patients [17.74% vs. 17.24%; unadjusted hazard ratio （HR）： 1.035; 95% confi- dence interval （CI）： 0.556-1.929; adjusted HR： 1.026; 95% CI： 0.544-1.937]. However, the re-infarction rate was significantly higher in dual therapy than triple therapy patients （14.52% vs. 5.34%; unadjusted HR： 2.807; 95% CI： 1.329-5.928; adjusted HR： 2.333; 95% CI： 1.078-5.047）. In addition, there was no difference between two regimes in all-cause death and severe bleeding. Conclusions In real-life patients with ACS following PCI and with an indication of OAC, triple therapy was not associated with an increased rate of adverse out- comes compared to dual therapy. Moreover, it decreased risk of re-infarction and did not increase risk of severe bleeding.展开更多
文摘Introduction: Lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is a serious cardiovascular disease. People living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at risk. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of LEAD and identify the associated factors among people living with HIV who were followed at the departmental university hospital Ouémé-Plateau in Benin. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. It included all HIV-infected people who were monitored at the department of medicine of the target hospital during the study period and met the inclusion criteria (followed for at least three months, aged at least 25 years, and having given their written consent to participate). Data were collected during an individual interview, followed by the measurement of parameters. The ankle brachial index ≤ 0.9 was used for the diagnosis of LEAD. Associated factors were searched through a multivariable logistic regression. Results: The prevalence of LEAD was 34.2% among 222 respondents having a mean age was 42.9 ± 10.8 years and a female predominance (77.5%). No significant association was found between the presence of LEAD and sociodemographic factors. The presence of LEAD was significantly associated with hypertension and antiretroviral therapy. Hypertensive patients had a higher risk of LEAD compared to non-hypertensive patients (OR = 1.98, 95% CI [1.04-3.83], p = 0.037). Those who were receiving second-line therapy also had a higher risk of LEAD compared to those on first-line therapy (OR = 2.95, 95% CI [1.14-7.60], p = 0.025). Conclusion: This study showed a high prevalence of LEAD especially among hypertensive patients and those who were receiving second-line antiretroviral therapy. LEAD diagnosis and management should be included in the routine care of people living with HIV in Benin.
文摘Background There is great debate on the possible adverse interaction between proton pump inhibitors （PPIs） and clopidogrel. In ad- dition, whether the use of PPIs affects the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor remains less known. We aimed to determine the impact of concomi- tant administration of PPIs and clopidogrel or ticagrelor on clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome （ACS） after percuta- neous coronary intervention （PCI）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data fi＇om a ＂real world＂, international, multi-center registry between 2003 and 2014 （n = 15,401） and assessed the impact of concomitant administration of PPIs and clopidogrel or ticagrelor on 1-year composite primary endpoint （all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding） in patients with ACS after PCI. Results Of 9429 patients in the final cohort, 54.8% （n = 5165） was prescribed a PPI at discharge. Patients receiving a PPI were older, more often female, and were more likely to have comorbidities. No association was observed between PPI use and the primary endpoint for patients receiving clopidogrel （ad- justed HR： 1.036; 95% CI： 0.903-1.189） or ticagrelor （adjusted HR： 2.320; 95% CI： 0.875-45.151） （Pinteraction = 0.2004）. Similarly, use of a PPI was not associated with increased risk of all-cause death, re-infarction, or a decreased risk of severe bleeding for patients treated with either clopidogrel or ticagrelor. Conclusions In patients with ACS following PCI, concomitant use of PPIs was not associated with in- creased risk of adverse outcomes in patients receiving either clopidogrel or ticagrelor. Our findings indicate it is reasonable to use a PPI in combination with clopidogrel or ticagrelor, especially in patients with a higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding.
文摘Objective The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients on oral anticoagulation （OAC） after acute coronary syndrome （ACS） and percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） remains debated. This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of OAC plus clopidogrel with or without aspirin in a real-world setting. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data from an international, multi-center registry be- tween 2003 and 2014 （n = 15,401）. Patients with ACS and receiving OAC after PCI were screened. The composite primary endpoint was 1-year all-cause death, re-infarction, or severe bleeding. Results The final analysis enrolled 642 patients including 62 patients （9.7%） with OAC and clopidogrel （dual therapy）, and 580 patients （90.3%） with the combination of aspirin, OAC and clopidogrel （triple therapy）. Pa- tients on triple therapy were more often female and were more likely to have comorbidities. There was no significant difference regarding the primary end point between dual therapy with triple therapy patients [17.74% vs. 17.24%; unadjusted hazard ratio （HR）： 1.035; 95% confi- dence interval （CI）： 0.556-1.929; adjusted HR： 1.026; 95% CI： 0.544-1.937]. However, the re-infarction rate was significantly higher in dual therapy than triple therapy patients （14.52% vs. 5.34%; unadjusted HR： 2.807; 95% CI： 1.329-5.928; adjusted HR： 2.333; 95% CI： 1.078-5.047）. In addition, there was no difference between two regimes in all-cause death and severe bleeding. Conclusions In real-life patients with ACS following PCI and with an indication of OAC, triple therapy was not associated with an increased rate of adverse out- comes compared to dual therapy. Moreover, it decreased risk of re-infarction and did not increase risk of severe bleeding.
