Aspirin Dosing for the Prevention and Treatment of Ischemic Stroke: An Indication-Specific Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of aspirin for the treatment and prevention of ischemic stroke and identify the minimum dose proven to be effective for each indication. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and MEDLINE searches (January 2009–January 2010) were performed to identify primary literature, using search terms including aspirin, stroke prevention, acute ischemic stroke, acetylsalicylic acid, atrial fibrillation, myocardial infarction, and carotid endarterectomy. Additionally, reference citations from publications identified were reviewed. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles published in English were evaluated and relevant primary literature evaluating the efficacy of aspirin in the prevention of stroke was included in this review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Antiplatelet therapy is the benchmark for the prevention of ischemic stroke. Aspirin has been proven to prevent ischemic stroke in a variety of settings. Despite the frequency at which aspirin continues to be prescribed in patients at risk of ischemic stroke, there remains confusion in clinical practice as to what minimum dose is required in various at-risk patients. A thorough review of the primary literature suggests that low-dose (50–81 mg daily) aspirin is insufficient for some indications. Acute ischemic stroke treatment requires 160–325 mg, while atrial fibrillation and carotid arterial disease require daily doses of 325 and 81–325 mg, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence suggests that aspirin dosing must be individualized according to indication. Recommendations provided by national guidelines at times recommend lower doses of aspirin than have been proven effective. Higher doses are indicated for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (325mg) and acute ischemic stroke patients (160–325 mg). Aspirin has not yet been proven effective for primary prevention of strokes in men, and a minimum dose for these patients cannot be determined from the available data

Hemodynamic Modeling of Biological Aortic Valve Replacement Using Preoperative Data Only

Objectives: Prediction of aortic hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement (AVR) could help optimize treatment planning and improve outcomes. This study aims to demonstrate an approach to predict postoperative maximum velocity, maximum pressure gradient, secondary flow degree (SFD), and normalized flow displacement (NFD) in patients receiving biological AVR. Methods: Virtual AVR was performed for 10 patients, who received actual AVR with a biological prosthesis. The virtual AVRs used only preoperative anatomical and 4D flow MRI data. Subsequently, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations were performed and the abovementioned hemodynamic parameters compared between postoperative 4D flow MRI data and CFD results. Results: For maximum velocities and pressure gradients, postoperative 4D flow MRI data and CFD results were strongly correlated (R 2 = 0.75 and R-2 = 0.81) with low root mean square error (0.21 m/s and 3.8 mmHg). SFD and NFD were moderately and weakly correlated at R 2 = 0.44 and R 2 = 0.20, respectively. Flow visualization through streamlines indicates good qualitative agreement between 4D flow MRI data and CFD results in most cases. Conclusion: The approach presented here seems suitable to estimate postoperative maximum velocity and pressure gradient in patients receiving biological AVR, using only preoperative MRI data. The workflow can be performed in a reasonable time frame and offers a method to estimate postoperative valve prosthesis performance and to identify patients at risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch preoperatively. Novel parameters, such as SFD and NFD, appear to be more sensitive, and estimation seems harder. Further workflow optimization and validation of results seems warranted

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance findings in non‐hospitalized paediatric patients after recovery from COVID‐19

Aims: Our study aimed to investigate the cardiac involvement with sensitive tissue characterization in non-hospitalized children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Methods and results: We prospectively enrolled children who recovered from mildly symptomatic COVID-19 infection between November 2020 and January 2021. Patients underwent CMR at 1.5 T (Achieva, Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands) including cine images, native T1 and T2 mapping. Healthy children and paediatric patients with biopsy-proven myocarditis served as control groups. We performed CMR in 18 children with a median (25th-75th percentile) age of 12 (10-15) years, 38 (24-47) days after positive PCR test, and compared them with 7 healthy controls [15 (10-19) years] and 9 patients with myocarditis [10 (4-16) years]. The COVID-19 patients reported no cardiac symptoms. None of the COVID-19 patients showed CMR findings consistent with a myocarditis. Three patients (17%) from the COVID-19 cohort presented with minimal pericardial effusion. CMR parameters of COVID-19 patients, including volumetric and strain values as well as T1 and T2 times, were not significantly different from healthy controls, but from myocarditis patients. These had significantly reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (P = 0.035), LV global longitudinal strain, and left atrial strain values as well as elevated native T1 values compared with COVID-19 patients (P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions There was no evidence of myocardial inflammation, fibrosis, or functional cardiac impairment in the studied cohort of children recently. CMR findings were comparable with those of healthy controls. Pericardial effusion suggests a mild pericarditis in a small subgroup. This is pointing to a minor clinical relevance of myocardial involvement in children after mildly symptomatic COVID-19 infections

Surrogates for myocardial power and power efficiency in patients with aortic valve disease

We aimed to assess surrogate markers for left ventricular (LV) myocardial power and efficiency in patients with isolated aortic stenosis (AS) and combined stenosis/regurgitation (AS/AR). In AS (n = 59), AS/AR (n = 21) and controls (n = 14), surrogates for LV myocardial power and circulatory/external myocardial efficiency were obtained from cardiac MRI. Median surrogate LV myocardial power was increased in AS, 7.7 W/m2 (interquartile range 6.0-10.2; p = 0.010) and AS/AR, 10.8 W/m2 (8.9-13.4; p < 0.001) when compared to controls, 5.4 W/m2 (4.2-6.5), and was lower in AS than AS/AR (p < 0.001). Surrogate circulatory efficiency was decreased in AS, 8.6% (6.8-11.1; p < 0.001) and AS/AR, 5.4% (4.1-6.2; p < 0.001) when compared to controls, 11.8% (9.8-16.9). Surrogate external myocardial efficiency was higher in AS, 15.2% (11.9-18.6) than in AS/AR, 12.2% (10.1-14.2; p = 0.031) and was significantly lower compared to controls, 12.2% (10.7-18.1) in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), 9.8% (8.1-11.7; p = 0.025). In 16% of all cases, left ventricular mass/volume indices and EF were within normal ranges, wheras surrogate LV myocardial power was elevated and patients were symptomatic. Although influenced by pressure/volume load, the myocardium is additionally affected by remodelling processes. Surrogates for circulatory efficiency and LV myocardial power gradually reflect alterations in patients with AS and AS/AR, even when surrogate external myocardial efficiency, EF, mass and volume indices still remain compensated

The Effects of Intervention on Heart Power in Aortic Coarctation

Background In aortic coarctation, current guidelines recommend reducing pressure gradients that exceed given thresholds. From a physiological standpoint this should ideally improve the energy expenditure of the heart and thus prevent long term organ damage. Objectives The aim was to assess the effects of interventional treatment on external and internal heart power (EHP, IHP) in patients with aortic coarctation and to explore the correlation of these parameters to pressure gradients obtained from heart catheterization. Methods In a collective of 52 patients with aortic coarctation 25 patients received stenting and/or balloon angioplasty, and 20 patients underwent MRI before and after an interventional treatment procedure. EHP and IHP were computed based on catheterization and MRI measurements. Along with the power efficiency these were combined in a cardiac energy profile. Results By intervention, the catheter gradient was significantly reduced from 21.8±9.4 to 6.2±6.1mmHg (p<0.001). IHP was significantly reduced after intervention, from 8.03±5.2 to 4.37±2.13W (p < 0.001). EHP was 1.1±0.3 W before and 1.0±0.3W after intervention, p = 0.044. In patients initially presenting with IHP above 5W intervention resulted in a significant reduction in IHP from 10.99±4.74 W to 4.94±2.45W (p<0.001), and a subsequent increase in power efficiency from 14 to 26% (p = 0.005). No significant changes in IHP, EHP or power efficiency were observed in patients initially presenting with IHP < 5W. Conclusion It was demonstrated that interventional treatment of coarctation resulted in a decrease in IHP. Pressure gradients, as the most widespread clinical parameters in coarctation, did not show any correlation to changes in EHP or IHP. This raises the question of whether they should be the main focus in coarctation interventions. Only patients with high IHP of above 5W showed improvement in IHP and power efficiency after the treatment procedure. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT0259194