Is Nonmicronized Diosmin 600 mg as Effective as Micronized Diosmin 900 mg plus Hesperidin 100 mg on Chronic Venous Disease Symptoms? Results of a Noninferiority Study

Background. Phlebotonics have beneficial effects on some symptoms related to chronic venous disease (CVD) of the lower limbs. The most commonly used one is diosmin, available in a pure semisynthetic form or as a micronized purified flavonoid fraction. Patients and Methods. The primary objective of this single-blind, randomized, parallel-group, prospective study was to assess the clinical noninferiority of nonmicronized diosmin 600 mg once daily (D-group) compared to micronized diosmin 900 mg plus hesperidin 100 mg once daily (D/H-group) over a 6-month treatment period. Adult patients with a symptomatic CVD of the lower limbs (C0-C3 grade; 20-60 mm on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS)) were included. The primary endpoint was the change (from baseline to last postbaseline value) of the intensity of the lower-limb symptoms on VAS. Results. 114 patients (mean age, 44.4 years; women, 90.4%) were randomized in the per-protocol analysis (D-group, n=57; D/H-group, n=57). Symptoms significantly improved in both groups with adjusted mean VAS changes of -24.9 mm (p<0.0001) in the D-group and -22.8 mm (p<0.0001) in the D/H-group, corresponding to approximately 50% reduction in basal symptom intensity. The difference between groups was -2.1 mm with an upper limit of one-sided 90% confidence interval equal to 1.0 mm for a noninferiority margin set at 20 mm (noninferiority demonstrated). Intent-to-treat analysis confirmed per-protocol analysis. Difficulty in swallowing the tablets (VAS) was significantly lower in the D-group compared to the D/H-group (9.4 mm and 54.7 mm at 6 months, respectively; p<0.0001). The overall safety of both study drugs was good. Conclusion. Nonmicronized diosmin 600 mg was proven to have a noninferior efficacy compared to micronized diosmin 900 mg plus hesperidin 100 mg, associated with greater ease in swallowing the tablet

25 mm Hg versus 35 mm Hg elastic compression stockings to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome after deep vein thrombosis (CELEST): a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

International audienceBackground: The optimal strength of compression needed to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after a proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is debated. We aimed to assess whether 25 mm Hg elastic compression stockings (ECS) are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS after a DVT.Methods: In this multicentre, double-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with a first ipsilateral proximal DVT attending 46 French vascular medicine hospital departments or private practices. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre, age, and sex; with varying block sizes of two and four) to wear 25 mm Hg or 35 mm Hg ECS for 2 years. The primary outcome was the cumulative rate of PTS 2 years after inclusion, defined by a Villalta scale (≥5). Efficacy was assessed by intention-to-treat and in eligible participants who had complete primary outcome data. A per-protocol analysis was also conducted among compliant patients as a secondary outcome measure. Safety was assessed in all participants who used ECS at least once, and for which we have at least some tolerance information during follow-up. The margin for non-inferiority was 12·5%. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01578122, and has been completed.Findings: Between June 28, 2012, and July 21, 2017, we enrolled 341 eligible participants who consented to randomisation. 233 (68%) were men and median age was 59 years (IQR 45-70). Collection of ethnicity and race as a routine research variable is not authorised in France. Median follow-up was 735 days (IQR 721-760). 249 (73%) had complete data at 2 years. For the primary analysis, 40 (31%) of 129 participants with complete data in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and 40 (33%) of 120 in the 35 mm Hg group had PTS (absolute difference -2·3% [90% CI -12·1 to 7·4], pnon-inferiority=0·0062; relative risk 0·93, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·33). Results remained similar after imputation of missing data in patients we were authorised to do so: the cumulative proportion of PTS was 45 (29%) of 154 in the 25 mm Hg ECS group versus 52 (35%) of 148 in the 35 mm Hg ECS group (relative risk 0·83, 95% CI 0·60 to 1·16). Absolute difference was -5·9%, (90% CI -14·7 to 2·9), p=0·0003 for non-inferiority. Adherence was optimal (>80% and modified GIRERD score of 0-2) for 75 (51%) of 146 patients assigned to 25 mm Hg ECS and for 56 (42%) of 134 patients assigned to 35 mm Hg ECS (p=0·11). Regarding major adverse events related to ECS, there were no between-group differences in rates of deep vein thrombosis (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), ipsilateral leg ulcer (0 vs 1 [0·6%]), infection (0 vs 0), or death (0 vs 0) between the 169 patients evaluated in the 25 mm Hg ECS group and the 159 patients in the 35 mm Hg ECS group. Two (1%) of 328 patients who ever wore ESC developed ECS-related serious adverse events, one distal DVT and one leg ulcer (both in the 35 mm Hg ECS group). In the 25 mm Hg group, 6 patients died, 14 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 7 had a major bleed. In the 35 mm Hg group, 5 patients died, 10 had a venous thromboembolic recurrence (proximal DVT or pulmonary embolism), and 6 had a major bleed.Interpretation: Although we did not reach the prespecified sample size, our results suggest that 25 mm Hg ECS are non-inferior to 35 mm Hg ECS in preventing PTS. Larger more powerful studies are needed

Antibiotic prophylaxis in preterm premature rupture of membranes at 24–31 weeks’ gestation: Perinatal and 2‐year outcomes in the EPIPAGE‐2 cohort

International audienceObjectiveTo compare different antibiotic prophylaxis administered after preterm premature rupture of membranes to determine whether any were associated with differences in obstetric and/or neonatal outcomes and/or neurodevelopmental outcomes at 2 years of corrected age.DesignProspective, nationwide, population-based EPIPAGE-2 cohort study of preterm infants.SettingFrance, 2011.SampleWe included 492 women with a singleton pregnancy and a diagnosis of preterm premature rupture of membranes at 24–31 weeks. Exclusion criteria were contraindication to expectant management or indication for antibiotic therapy other than preterm premature rupture of membranes. Antibiotic prophylaxis was categorised as amoxicillin (n = 345), macrolide (n = 30), third-generation cephalosporin (n = 45) or any combinations covering Streptococcus agalactiae and >90% of Escherichia coli (n = 72), initiated within 24 hours after preterm premature rupture of membranes.MethodsPopulation-averaged robust Poisson models.Main Outcome MeasuresSurvival at discharge without severe neonatal morbidity, 2-year neurodevelopment.ResultsWith amoxicillin, macrolide, third-generation cephalosporin and combinations, 78.5%, 83.9%, 93.6% and 86.0% of neonates were discharged alive without severe morbidity. The administration of third-generation cephalosporin or any E. coli-targeting combinations was associated with improved survival without severe morbidity (adjusted risk ratio 1.25 [95% confidence interval 1.08–1.45] and 1.10 [95 % confidence interval 1.01–1.20], respectively) compared with amoxicillin. We evidenced no increase in neonatal sepsis related to third-generation cephalosporin-resistant pathogen.ConclusionIn preterm premature rupture of membranes at 24–31 weeks, antibiotic prophylaxis based on third-generation cephalosporin may be associated with improved survival without severe neonatal morbidity when compared with amoxicillin, with no evidence of increase in neonatal sepsis related to third-generation cephalosporin-resistant pathogen