[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To describe 2 cases of hemopericardium following treatment with dabigatran.
A 70-year-old male with a history of dabigatran use presented with cough, fatigue, and bloody stools. The patient had a large hyperdense pericardial effusion caused by accumulation of bloody fluid, leading to hypotension and shock. Approximately 1000 mL of hemorrhagic fluid was drained from the pericardial space. A 77-year-old female was admitted for treatment of pneumonia and atrial fibrillation. Dabigatran was initiated and, after 6 doses, the patient developed abdominal pain, respiratory distress, and shock. She was diagnosed with pericardial effusion leading to cardiac tamponade. Pericardiocentesis and thoracentesis procedures removed a cumulative total of 2000 mL of bloody fluid.
Dabigatran is an oral direct thrombin inhibitor approved for the reduction of stroke and systemic embolism risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. In December 2011, the Food and Drug Administration released a statement describing serious bleeding events associated with dabigatran use. According to the Naranjo scale, the cases presented here had probable associations between hemopericardium and dabigatran. While there is no known literature supporting this relationship, there are documented cases of warfarin-induced hemopericardium.
These case reports highlight the potential for dabigatran to cause hemopericardium and cardiac tamponade. Additional reports may better elucidate (or characterize) the risk of dabigatran-induced hemopericardium and cardiac tamponade.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 07/2012; 46(7-8):e18. DOI:10.1345/aph.1R112 · 2.92 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of cilostazol for secondary prevention of non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke.
PubMed and MEDLINE searches were performed (January 1970-September 2011) using the key words cilostazol, antiplatelet, aspirin, acetylsalicylic acid, secondary stroke prevention, ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, intracranial, cerebrovascular accident, and transient ischemic attack. Additionally, reference citations from publications identified were reviewed.
Articles published in English and relevant primary literature evaluating the efficacy and safety of cilostazol in the secondary prevention of atherosclerotic ischemic stroke were included.
Antiplatelet therapy plays a vital role in the multifaceted approach to secondary stroke prevention. Current American Heart Association/American Stroke Association clinical guidelines for secondary stroke prevention support the use of aspirin, clopidogrel, and combination aspirin/extended-release dipyridamole. The antiplatelet, antithrombotic, and vasodilatory effects of cilostazol make it a potential alternative agent for atherosclerotic stroke prevention. Recent literature has demonstrated superior efficacy of cilostazol 100 mg twice daily for secondary stroke prevention compared to placebo and aspirin. Three clinical trials were reviewed (1 placebo-controlled, 2 aspirin-controlled), all of which were conducted in Japan or China. Cilostazol reduced the primary outcome of recurrence of stroke, with significantly fewer major bleeding events when compared to aspirin.
Available literature suggests that cilostazol may be safer and more effective than aspirin in the secondary prevention of stroke in Asian patients. Further large-scale studies in more heterogeneous study populations are warranted to determine whether cilostazol is a viable therapeutic option for patients with a history of non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy 02/2012; 46(3):394-402. DOI:10.1345/aph.1Q420 · 2.92 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Purpose: To determine whether the combination of bupropion SR and varenicline offers improved smoking cessation outcomes compared to varenicline monotherapy or to combination of bupro-pion SR and nicotine patch. Methods: This retrospective chart review included 489 volunteer enrolees in a Veterans Affairs (VA) tobacco cessation clinic who received one of the three treatments upon clinic enrolment. The study endpoints were smoking cessation and clinic completion rates, changes in the number of cigarettes smoked, carbon monoxide (CO) levels, urges to smoke, self-confidence to quit and medication-attributed adverse effects. Results: The relative smoking cessation rates were 33%, 32%, and 40% for bupropion SR and nicotine patch, bupropion SR and varenicline, and varenicline groups, respectively. The 0.21 p value established that no significant cessation rate differences existed between any of the groups. Varenicline alone or in combination was as well tolerated as the combination of bupropion SR and nicotine patch. Conclusions: The combination of bupropion SR and varenicline did not demonstrate any smoking cessation advantage over varenicline monotherapy or the combination of bupropion SR and nicotine patch and therefore do not support the use of bupro-pion SR and varenicline over varenicline monotherapy.
The Journal of Smoking Cessation 06/2011; 6(01). DOI:10.1375/jsc.6.1.65