Interference of NSAIDs with the thrombocyte inhibitory effect of aspirin: a placebo-controlled, ex vivo, serial placebo-controlled serial crossover study.

PURPOSE: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) are often prescribed concurrently in patients with nociceptive pain and cardiovascular comorbidity. NSAIDs and ASA inhibit the same COX-enzymes, and thus may interact. ASA's cardioprotective antiplatelet effect is entirely COX-1 dependent. NSAIDs can be either non-COX-1 and COX-2 selective or COX-2 selective. The aim of this study was to examine the interaction between ASA and different selective and nonselective NSAIDs on thrombocyte function. METHODS: Single-blind, prospective, placebo-controlled, ex vivo, serial crossover trial of 3-day cycles separated by washout periods of at least 12 days in 30 healthy volunteers, evaluating interaction on ASA's antithrombocyte effect by naproxen, ibuprofen, meloxicam, or etoricoxib taken 2 h before ASA. Ex vivo thrombocyte function, closure time (CT) in seconds, was measured using the Platelet Function Analyzer 100 (PFA-100). CT prolongation during a cycle reflects thrombocyte inhibitory effect. ASA nonresponse was defined as CT prolongation <40 % in the placebo cycle. ASA nonresponders were excluded. Wilcoxon signed-rank was used to evaluate NSAID effect on ASA-induced CT prolongation. RESULTS: Ibuprofen and naproxen inhibit ASA's antithrombocyte effect below the nonresponse threshold. Etoricoxib and meloxicam do not cause relevant change in ASA thrombocyte inhibition. Naproxen has an inherent weak thrombocyte inhibitory action below the ASA response threshold. CONCLUSIONS: COX-1 affinity determines the interaction between NSAIDs and ASA on thrombocyte adhesion and aggregation. Ibuprofen and naproxen, but not etoricoxib or meloxicam, taken 2 h before ASA, significantly inhibit ASA's antithrombocyte effect.

The reliability of automatic measurement of left ventricular function with dual-source computed tomography datasets.

The purpose of the study was to assess the reliability of (semi-) automatic left ventricular (LV) function measurements using three different software packages on the same dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) datasets and to compare agreement among the software packages. Forty consecutive patients, undergoing cardiac DSCT were included (31 men, mean age 58±14 years). LV function analysis was performed with all three software packages. ANOVA testing was used to determine the difference among the repeated measurements and the difference among the software packages. Bland-Altman plots were computed to describe the agreement among the software packages. No significant difference was found among the repeated measurements. In the comparison of the three software packages, a significant difference was observed when measurements were used with minimal user interaction. When end-diastolic and end-systolic phases were manually set, there was no overall significant difference, but in 12.5% of patients a large (>10%) difference in LVEF was found. All three software packages have good intraobserver variability, but the results of the three packages were significantly different. For clinical use, one should be aware of the clinical impact of possible segmentation flaws when (semi-)automatic LV function assessment is used.