Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / General / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

aspirin safer than warfarin

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Zee - 31 Mar 2005 18:49 GMT
March 31, 2005

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/352/13/1305

Comparison of Warfarin and Aspirin for Symptomatic Intracranial
Arterial Stenosis
Marc I. Chimowitz, M.B., Ch.B., Michael J. Lynn, M.S., Harriet
Howlett-Smith, R.N., Barney J. Stern, M.D., Vicki S. Hertzberg, Ph.D.,
Michael R. Frankel, M.D., Steven R. Levine, M.D., Seemant Chaturvedi,
M.D., Scott E. Kasner, M.D., Curtis G. Benesch, M.D., Cathy A. Sila,
M.D., Tudor G. Jovin, M.D., Jose G. Romano, M.D., for the
Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease Trial Investigators

ABSTRACT

Background Atherosclerotic intracranial arterial stenosis is an
important cause of stroke. Warfarin is commonly used in preference to
aspirin for this disorder, but these therapies have not been compared
in a randomized trial.

Methods We randomly assigned patients with transient ischemic attack or
stroke caused by angiographically verified 50 to 99 percent stenosis of
a major intracranial artery to receive warfarin (target international
normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0) or aspirin (1300 mg per day) in a
double-blind, multicenter clinical trial. The primary end point was
ischemic stroke, brain hemorrhage, or death from vascular causes other
than stroke.

Results After 569 patients had undergone randomization, enrollment was
stopped because of concerns about the safety of the patients who had
been assigned to receive warfarin. During a mean follow-up period of
1.8 years, adverse events in the two groups included death (4.3 percent
in the aspirin group vs. 9.7 percent in the warfarin group; hazard
ratio for aspirin relative to warfarin, 0.46; 95 percent confidence
interval, 0.23 to 0.90; P=0.02), major hemorrhage (3.2 percent vs. 8.3
percent, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95 percent confidence
interval, 0.18 to 0.84; P=0.01), and myocardial infarction or sudden
death (2.9 percent vs. 7.3 percent, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.40;
95 percent confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.91; P=0.02). The rate of
death from vascular causes was 3.2 percent in the aspirin group and 5.9
percent in the warfarin group (P=0.16); the rate of death from
nonvascular causes was 1.1 percent and 3.8 percent, respectively
(P=0.05). The primary end point occurred in 22.1 percent of the
patients in the aspirin group and 21.8 percent of those in the warfarin
group (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.73 to
1.48; P=0.83).

Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates of
adverse events and provided no benefit over aspirin in this trial.
Aspirin should be used in preference to warfarin for patients with
intracranial arterial stenosis.
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 01 Apr 2005 03:04 GMT
>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates of
adverse events and provided no benefit over aspirin in this trial.
Aspirin should be used in preference to warfarin for patients with
intracranial arterial stenosis. <<

COMMENT:
A good study, but we should note that for various reasons, aspirin and
similar antiplatelet drugs have always been the choice to prevent
stroke after TIA.  Warfarin has been looked at in other stroke
prevention studies, and it's not that great. Nor is it very good at
preventing coronary thrombosis, which presumably is a similar type of
process to brain thrombosis.

Warfarin is indicated is chronic atrial fibrillation, to prevent
embolic stroke. And similarly with mechanical aortic and mitral valves,
for the same reason. Aspirin has been directly compared with it in
*these* situations, and doesn't do nearly as well. Nobody knows why.
Arterial clots due to be embolic seem to be different in some way than
clots which form in situ. Even clots which form in arteries, where the
blood is at high velocity and pressure, similar to the situation that
presumably obtains in the left side of the heart where Warfarin does
work to prevent emboli formation.

SBH
Zee - 01 Apr 2005 03:15 GMT
> >>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
> of
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
> SBH

Thank you Steve. No definitive word in NEJM aspirin for women under 65
either.

Zee
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 01 Apr 2005 03:44 GMT
> >>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
> of
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> presumably obtains in the left side of the heart where Warfarin does
> work to prevent emboli formation.

The left atrial appendage is actually a site of slow velocity and low
pressure (typically less than 10 mmHg).  It is currently believed that
the slower the blood flow in the left atrial appendage (decreased LAA
ejection fraction), the greater the risk of clot formation:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?E27412BCA

So that the following generalizations can be made:

(1) Antiplatelet agents like aspirin and clopidogrel are effective in
situations with high flow and pressure such as exposed thrombogenic
surfaces (type IV collagen in rupture plaques or bare surgical steel of
stented occlusive lesions) in arteries.

(2) Warfarin is effective in situations with low flow and pressure such
as the case in veins with DVTs and in the left atrial appendage with
atrial fibrillation.


At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Al - 01 Apr 2005 04:49 GMT
>>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
>>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> surfaces (type IV collagen in rupture plaques or bare surgical steel of
> stented occlusive lesions) in arteries.

I believe warfarin reduces the tendency of blook to clot by
destroying vitamin K.

Does aspirin have the same effect or does it work in a different
fashion?

> (2) Warfarin is effective in situations with low flow and pressure such
> as the case in veins with DVTs and in the left atrial appendage with
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> (6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
> (7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 01 Apr 2005 13:44 GMT
> >>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> I believe warfarin reduces the tendency of blook to clot by
> destroying vitamin K.

It blocks the body's use of vitamin K to produce K-dependent clotting
factors.

> Does aspirin have the same effect or does it work in a different
> fashion?

Aspirin changes platelets and does not affect levels of K-dependent
clotting factors.


At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Al - 01 Apr 2005 17:44 GMT
>>>>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> clotting factors.
>  

Therefore, it would seem that aspirin would be advantageous
for an elderly woman with weak bones?

How does one make the decision?

Warfarin is monitored.
Can the aspirin be monitored?
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 01 Apr 2005 19:07 GMT
> >>>>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
> >>>>
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
> Therefore, it would seem that aspirin would be advantageous
> for an elderly woman with weak bones?

For prevention of heart attacks and strokes, yes, whether or not bones
are weak.

> How does one make the decision?
>
> Warfarin is monitored.
> Can the aspirin be monitored?

There is not a need for monitoring.

At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Al - 01 Apr 2005 19:15 GMT
>>>>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
> It blocks the body's use of vitamin K to produce K-dependent clotting
> factors.

Could the above statement be refined or extended?  It then also
blocks the use of vitamin K in maintaining bone mineral
density, correct?

>>Does aspirin have the same effect or does it work in a different
>>fashion?
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Andrew
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 02 Apr 2005 00:09 GMT
> >>>>>>Conclusions Warfarin was associated with significantly higher rates
> >>>>
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> blocks the use of vitamin K in maintaining bone mineral
> density, correct?

No.


At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Jim Chinnis - 01 Apr 2005 06:00 GMT
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in part:

>The left atrial appendage is actually a site of slow velocity and low
>pressure (typically less than 10 mmHg).  It is currently believed that
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
>Board-Certified Cardiologist

Thank you for a clear and valuable contribution.
--
Jim Chinnis   Warrenton, Virginia, USA
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 01 Apr 2005 13:44 GMT
> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in part:
>
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> Thank you for a clear and valuable contribution.

You are welcome :-)

At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 01 Apr 2005 22:38 GMT
So that the following generalizations can be made:

(1) Antiplatelet agents like aspirin and clopidogrel are effective in
situations with high flow and pressure such as exposed thrombogenic
surfaces (type IV collagen in rupture plaques or bare surgical steel of

stented occlusive lesions) in arteries.

(2) Warfarin is effective in situations with low flow and pressure such

as the case in veins with DVTs and in the left atrial appendage with
atrial fibrillation.

====================================
COMMENT:

No, sorry, you CANNOT make such a generalization, and I already
mentioned one reason why. Warfarin works, as noted, to prevent emboli
from mechanical aortic valves, a high flow high pressure situation with
exposed thromogenic surfaces, if ever there was one. Asprin is not
adequate or indicated for this use, nor are any other antiplatelet
agents.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 02 Apr 2005 00:08 GMT
> So that the following generalizations can be made:
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> adequate or indicated for this use, nor are any other antiplatelet
> agents.

Actually, for the mechanical aortic valve, one third of the cardiac
cycle is high pressure and high flow while the other two thirds is
diastolic down to 0-10 mmHg on the ventricular side of the valve with
slow diastolic filling across the mitral valve plus the thrombogenic
surface of the mechanical aortic valve.

At His service,

Andrew

--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist

**
Suggested Reading:
(1) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048
(2) http://makeashorterlink.com/?O2F325D1A
(3) http://makeashorterlink.com/?X1C62661A
(4) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U1E13130A
(5) http://makeashorterlink.com/?K6F72510A
(6) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I24E5151A
(7) http://makeashorterlink.com/?I22222129
Sharon Hope - 02 Apr 2005 00:44 GMT
Given that warfarin (Coumadin) started out as rat poison, and so far I have
never heard of using aspirin for that purpose, this headline is somewhat
intuitively true.

> March 31, 2005
>
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> Aspirin should be used in preference to warfarin for patients with
> intracranial arterial stenosis.
zee - 02 Apr 2005 00:54 GMT
> Given that warfarin (Coumadin) started out as rat poison, and so far I have
> never heard of using aspirin for that purpose, this headline is somewhat
> intuitively true.

Aspirin safer than warfarin:

<$$>  File under the same category as the study (PFIZER, I believe)
that found  women's sexuality works differently from mens.

Zee

> > March 31, 2005
> >
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> > Aspirin should be used in preference to warfarin for patients with
> > intracranial arterial stenosis.
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 02 Apr 2005 01:01 GMT
>>Given that warfarin (Coumadin) started out as rat poison, and so far I have
never heard of using aspirin for that purpose, this headline is
somewhat
intuitively true. <<

Indeed. The surprise was the Warfarin could be used in medicine at all.
In the 1950's some depressed sailor tried to commit suicide with it,
and failed. They saved him with vitamin K. There was no saving people
who killed themselves with the old white phosphorus rat poisons!  So
they took a second look at Warfarin and gave it a shot as a human drug.

There was some precident for Warfarin. It's a synthetic version of
dicoumarin, a fungus product which causes sweet clover bleeding disease
in calves. That's not always fatal, and indeed dicoumarol was used
breifly in medicine in the role what Warfarin is now, before they
decided Warfarin was cheaper, and tractable enough to work with.
(Though it's still nasty and scary stuff).

The sweet clover disease work was done as pure science by the Wisconsin
Alumni Research Foundation (WARF).  Hence the rat poison name.

The stuff is a great rat poison because it doesn't kill immediately,
but causes hemorrage and thus, thirst. Rats go outside to seek water,
and die out there, instead of in your walls.

SBH
zee - 02 Apr 2005 01:12 GMT
> >>Given that warfarin (Coumadin) started out as rat poison, and so far
> I have
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> SBH

WARF! You're kidding right? You're wasted here.

Zee
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 02 Apr 2005 05:07 GMT
>WARF! You're kidding right?<<

Sounds like April fools, but isn't.  The Warfian hypothesis is true.
Language influences worldview. The debate on naming Warfarin wasn't
even, ah, acronymious.

>> You're wasted here. <<

Nah. Academia won't pay for trivial pursuit. Unless it's in Women's
Studies or Art History, of course.

BTW, I wrote dicoumarin, but of course it's dicoumarol (as I first
said). There is no dicoumarin that I know of. Coumarin is a completely
separate plant product, and one that is neither a blood thinner or even
toxic. The generic name of the drug Warfarin is coumaDin (note the D),
which causes no end of confusion. I've even seen warnings on red clover
herbs that they might interact with anticoagulants. Reason: they
contain coumarin. Unless you're a fungus, you can't convert that to
anything that's going to bother clotting.

SBH
bae@cs.toronto.no-uce.edu - 02 Apr 2005 16:23 GMT
>BTW, I wrote dicoumarin, but of course it's dicoumarol (as I first
>said). There is no dicoumarin that I know of. Coumarin is a completely
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>contain coumarin. Unless you're a fungus, you can't convert that to
>anything that's going to bother clotting.

Coumarin is responsible for the pleasant vanilla or sweet hay scent of
sweet clover, and is used commercially in perfumes, flavourings, soaps,
etc.  It used to be extracted from tonka beans (the coumarou tree, in
French), but is now mostly made synthetically.  But yeah, it's not
physiologically active in humans, and AFAIK is GRAS.
Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 03 Apr 2005 01:10 GMT
>>Coumarin is responsible for the pleasant vanilla or sweet hay scent of
sweet clover, and is used commercially in perfumes, flavourings, soaps,

etc.  It used to be extracted from tonka beans (the coumarou tree, in
French), but is now mostly made synthetically.  But yeah, it's not
physiologically active in humans, and AFAIK is GRAS. <<

COMMENT:

It is indeed both GRAS and GRASS. :)   May may even have anticancer and
antiischemic properites. But it's a natural product like vitamins, so
developmental uses for it will be slow in coming. Fascinating stuff. I
have a bottle here in the lab. It's crystals and it does indeed smell
like grass freshcut with the lawnmower. Or newmown hay if you have
enough rural background to know that that smells like. Quite lovely.

SBH
Don Kirkman - 03 Apr 2005 00:48 GMT
It seems to me I heard somewhere that Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com
wrote in article
<1112414874.767115.222020@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>:

>>WARF! You're kidding right?<<

>Sounds like April fools, but isn't.  The Warfian hypothesis is true.
>Language influences worldview. The debate on naming Warfarin wasn't
>even, ah, acronymious.

>>> You're wasted here. <<

>Nah. Academia won't pay for trivial pursuit. Unless it's in Women's
>Studies or Art History, of course.

But it's a good thing nobody asked about Premarin, eh?  :-)
Signature

Don
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed
us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their
use.                                --Galileo Galilei

Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com - 03 Apr 2005 21:31 GMT
>>WARF! You're kidding right?<<
>Sounds like April fools, but isn't.  The Warfian hypothesis is true.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>Nah. Academia won't pay for trivial pursuit. Unless it's in Women's
>Studies or Art History, of course.

>>But it's a good thing nobody asked about Premarin, eh?  :-)

For sure. And bacitracin.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.