| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Altavilla, R., et al.
(författare)
-
Anticoagulation After Stroke in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: To Bridge or Not With Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Stroke. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 50:8, s. 2093-2100
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Purpose- Bridging therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin reportedly leads to a worse outcome for acute cardioembolic stroke patients because of a higher incidence of intracerebral bleeding. However, this practice is common in clinical settings. This observational study aimed to compare (1) the clinical profiles of patients receiving and not receiving bridging therapy, (2) overall group outcomes, and (3) outcomes according to the type of anticoagulant prescribed. Methods- We analyzed data of patients from the prospective RAF and RAF-NOACs studies. The primary outcome was defined as the composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, symptomatic cerebral bleeding, and major extracerebral bleeding observed at 90 days after the acute stroke. Results- Of 1810 patients who initiated oral anticoagulant therapy, 371 (20%) underwent bridging therapy with full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin. Older age and the presence of leukoaraiosis were inversely correlated with the use of bridging therapy. Forty-two bridged patients (11.3%) reached the combined outcome versus 72 (5.0%) of the nonbridged patients (P=0.0001). At multivariable analysis, bridging therapy was associated with the composite end point (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.7; P<0.0001), as well as ischemic (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3-3.9; P=0.005) and hemorrhagic (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.2-4.9; P=0.01) end points separately. Conclusions- Our findings suggest that patients receiving low-molecular-weight heparin have a higher risk of early ischemic recurrence and hemorrhagic transformation compared with nonbridged patients.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sen, P, et al.
(författare)
-
Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Rheumatology (Oxford, England). - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1462-0332 .- 1462-0324. ; 62:10, s. 3291-3301
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveCOVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys.MethodsThe first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups.ResultsWe analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs – OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs – OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7–10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8–0.97)].ConclusionVaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
