Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Amanda G Thrift a Department of Epidemiology and Preventive
Medicine, Monash Medical School, Alfred Hospital, Prahran 3181, Australia, b Neurology Department, Austin and
Repatriation Hospitals, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084, Australia
Correspondence to: Dr A
Thrift, National Stroke Research Institute, Austin and Repatriation
Medical Centre, West Heidelberg, Victoria 3081, Australia
thrift{at}austin.unimelb.edu.au
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To examine the association between use of aspirin or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and
intracerebral haemorrhage.
Design:
Case-control study.
Setting:
13 major city hospitals in the Melbourne and metropolitan area.
Subjects:
331 consecutive cases of stroke verified by computed tomography or postmortem examination, and 331 age (± 5 years) and sex matched controls who were community based neighbours.
Interventions:
Questionnaire administered to all
subjects either directly or by proxy with the next of kin. Drug use was validated by reviewing prescribing records held by the participants' doctors.
Main outcome measures:
Previous use of aspirin or
other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
Results:
Univariate analysis showed no increased
risk of intracerebral haemorrhage with low dose aspirin use in the preceding 2 weeks. Using multiple logistic regression to control for
possible confounding factors, the odds ratio associated with the use of
aspirin was 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.66, P=0.998) and
the odds ratio associated with the use of other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was 0.85 (0.45 to 1.61, P=0.611) compared with
respective non-users in the preceding fortnight. Moderate to high doses
of aspirin (>1225 mg/week spread over at least three doses) yielded an
odds ratio of 3.05 (1.02 to 9.14, P=0.047). There was no evidence of an
increased risk among subgroups defined by age, sex, blood pressure
status, alcohol intake, smoking, and the presence or absence of
previous cardiovascular disease.
Conclusions:
No increase in risk of intracerebral
haemorrhage was found among aspirin users overall or among those who
took low doses of the drug or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. These data provide evidence that doses of aspirin usually used
for prophylaxis against vascular disease produce no substantial increase in risk of intracerebral haemorrhage.
|
Key messages
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
An increased risk of intracerebral haemorrhage has been observed in several of the major primary and secondary prevention trials using aspirin.1-12 Because of the poor outcome in patients developing intracerebral haemorrhage,13-15 there has been concern that intracerebral haemorrhage might offset the benefits of aspirin treatment, particularly when used in low risk settings such as for the primary prevention of coronary heart disease. 2 16
Despite the large number of clinical trials of aspirin treatment there remains considerable uncertainty about the nature and extent of this risk. 2 4 5 8 11 12 17 18 Firstly, in each of the published trials the absolute numbers of cases of intracerebral haemorrhage have been small, leading to wide confidence intervals about the risk estimates. 4-8 17 19 The uncertainty is compounded by diagnostic inaccuracy, as in most trials only a minority of patients with stroke underwent computed tomography. 2 4-7 12 17-19 Secondly, there is little information about whether the relative risk, if any, is confined to identifiable subgroups such as elderly people or those with hypertension. Finally, it has not been clear whether any increased risk associated with aspirin treatment also affects those taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, which share many of the antiplatelet properties of aspirin. 20 21
To address these issues we established a case-control study to explore
the use of aspirin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs among
cases of intracerebral haemorrhage (verified by computed tomography and
postmortem examination) and age and sex matched controls. A principal
hypothesis of our study was that each of these drug groups would be
associated with an increased risk of intracerebral haemorrhage.
| |
Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The patients and methods have been described in detail elsewhere.22 Briefly, from 1990 to 1992 consecutive cases of primary intracerebral haemorrhage in Melbourne were identified by surveillance of discharge records of 13 major city hospitals and by a periodic inspection of coroner's records. The participating hospitals manage most of the cases of primary intracerebral haemorrhage in the metropolitan area, except for minor strokes and strokes occurring in elderly nursing home residents.
Inclusion criteria
Intracerebral haemorrhage was defined as
a sudden onset of an acute focal neurological deficit with evidence of
intraparenchymal haemorrhage provided by computed tomography (94.9%;
314/331), postmortem examination (4.8%; 16), or magnetic resonance
imaging (0.3%; 1). Patients were aged between 18 and 80 years, and the
intracerebral haemorrhage was their first episode of stroke (although
patients with previous transient ischaemic attacks were not excluded).
We excluded patients with intracerebral haemorrhages secondary to
arteriovenous malformations, tumours, clotting abnormalities,
blood discrasias, or anticoagulant (heparin, warfarin) or thrombolytic
use, or after the ingestion of sympathomimetic drugs, and patients with
haemorrhagic infarction. Haemorrhagic infarction was defined as a
patchy or diffuse haemorrhage within a definite cerebral infarction.
Controls
Controls were individually matched by age (± 5 years) and sex. They were identified by visiting houses in the same
street in which the case lived at the time of the stroke (in a strict
protocol) until a household with a matching individual free of previous
cerebrovascular disease was identified. This method of neighbourhood
selection allows for matching by socioeconomic status. To avoid
ascertainment bias toward unemployed or housebound individuals, repeat
visits were made up to three times during the evening and weekends if
no one was home during the day. The nurses conducting the visits were
required to verify that no potential control lived at each house before
moving on to the next house.
Questionnaire survey
Trained nurse interviewers administered structured questionnaires
to all participants eliciting information about potential risk factors.
All questions related to the time period immediately preceding the
stroke (cases) or interview (controls). Interview of controls was
undertaken by the same research nurse who interviewed the corresponding
case. Patients who had died or were unable to answer for themselves
were included by interview of next of kin. These proxy interviews
occurred in 43% of cases (142). To avoid information bias, individuals
acting as controls by proxy were asked to nominate an equivalent
relative to ensure a similar manner of interview to the corresponding
case and similar information sources used. Proxy interviewing occurred
for 31% of controls (101). When a proxy control was either not
available or refused to participate the index control was interviewed
instead. This occurred in 41 instances.
200 mg/day were included in this category.
The low dose category included those taking 100-175 mg/day, which is
the dose range widely used for vascular prophylaxis. These doses were
specified before any analysis was undertaken.
Information on other medical conditions was obtained at interview.
Hypertension, previous cardiovascular disease, and high serum
cholesterol concentrations were considered present when patients
reported that one or other of these conditions had been diagnosed by
their doctor.
Self reported height and weight data were used to calculate body mass
index. A never smoker was a person who had not smoked at least one
cigarette, cigar, or pipe per day for at least 3 months at some period
in his or her lifetime. A current smoker had smoked at least one cigar,
cigarette, or pipe per day for the preceding 3 months. The current
smoker category was further divided into those who smoked <20
cigarettes/day on average and those who smoked
20 cigarettes/day. A
former smoker did not meet the criteria for never or current smoking.
Alcohol intake was categorised into never drinker, previous drinker,
and three levels of current alcohol intake (acceptable, harmful, or
hazardous drinking). For men acceptable, hazardous, or harmful drinking
was consumption of 1-40 g of alcohol per day, >40-60 g/day, and
>60 g/day respectively, whereas for women it was 1-20 g/day,
>20-40 g/day, and >40 g/day respectively. Ten grams of alcohol
was considered to be equivalent to one standard drink.
Adherence to study procedures was monitored at weekly quality control
meetings. During these meetings procedures for recently obtained
interviews were discussed and response rates were carefully scrutinised.
Our study with 331 matched pairs was designed to achieve a power of
0.8, using a P value of 0.05 and with an estimated 15% of controls
(50) being aspirin users, to detect an odds ratio of 1.75.
Statistical analysis
We used conditional logistic
regression for matched data (using EGRET23) to
compute odds ratios approximating the relative risks of intracerebral
haemorrhage for various exposures. Initially, we calculated univariate
odds ratios for aspirin, other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,
and potentially confounding variables. We included all plausible
potential confounding factors in the multivariate analyses
(hypertension, serum cholesterol concentration, diabetes, previous
cardiovascular disease, body mass index, exercise, alcohol intake, and
smoking). We did not include age, sex, and socioeconomic status
because the cases were matched on these variables. Interactions between
aspirin use and potential confounding variables (age, hypertension,
smoking, alcohol intake, serum cholesterol concentration, exercise,
diabetes, sex, and previous cardiovascular disease) were assessed
by the likelihood ratio statistic.24 Confidence intervals
for odds ratios were based on large sample theory for conditional
maximum likelihood estimators.24 Two sided significance
levels were used throughout.
Ethics
Our study was approved by the responsible ethics
committees at Monash University and each of the participating hospitals.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We identified a total of 370 consecutive patients who were eligible for the study. Ten cases could not be contacted and 29 refused to participate, leaving a case series of 331 patients. To obtain the same number of controls, we identified 342 people matched for age, sex, and geography; 11 refused to participate. The mean age was 63.4 years (SD 12.4), and 60% (200) were men (table 1). Over 90% of the participants were white.
|
Overall, 17% of cases (55) and 18% of controls (58) reported taking aspirin in the fortnight before onset of stroke or interview (table 2). Using multiple logistic regression to control for possible confounding factors, the odds ratio for aspirin use was 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.66, P=0.998). Similarly, 13% of cases (42) and 14% of controls (47) reported taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the previous fortnight producing an adjusted odds ratio of 0.85 (0.45 to 1.61, P=0.611). A similar pattern was evident in individuals who took aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the previous 3 days.
|
When aspirin users were grouped according to their regular dosage
regimen, regular low dose (
1225 mg/week) intakes were reported by
5% of cases (16) and 6% of controls (21) producing an adjusted odds ratio of 0.86 (0.38 to 1.96, P=0.724). Moderate to high doses (>1225 mg/week) were reported by 6% of cases (19) and 3% of
controls (9) producing an adjusted odds ratio of 3.05 (1.02 to 9.14, P=0.047). The ratio of these two odds ratios was 3.53 (0.95 to 13.1, P=0.060). A similar pattern was observed when these analyses were
confined to those using either drug within the previous 3 days. These
analyses were specified as part of the original hypothesis of our study.
A further prespecified subgroup analysis was undertaken to determine whether the relative risk was increased selectively among members of an identified subgroup of aspirin users. Odds ratios for aspirin use (in the previous fortnight) were examined in subgroups defined by sex, blood pressure, history of cardiovascular disease, smoking, high serum cholesterol concentration, alcohol intake, or age (table 3). Three of the interactions were of borderline statistical significance at the 5% level (blood pressure, serum cholesterol concentration, and age), but there was no evidence of a substantially increased risk in any of these subgroups.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The results of our case-control study show that aspirin treatment in the doses commonly used for cardiovascular protection produces little, if any, increase in the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage. Higher doses were associated with a threefold increase in risk, although this was of borderline statistical significance. The 95% confidence intervals provide evidence to exclude odds ratios in excess of 1.7 among all aspirin users and of 2.0 for users of low dose aspirin. Low doses of aspirin have been shown to effectively inhibit the production of thromboxane A2 (98% inhibition) in platelets25 and to be associated with less gastrointestinal toxicity than are high doses. 11 26 27
A similar result was found among users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, where the overall adjusted odds ratio was 0.85. The 95% confidence interval indicates that the true odds ratio is unlikely to be >1.6.
Our findings are in keeping with those recently reported in a large cohort study of 87 678 US nurses.28 Over a 6 year period, 62 (0.07%) participants developed a haemorrhagic stroke. Among those taking between one and six doses of aspirin per week the relative risk was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.27 to 2.13). Those taking 7 to 14 doses per week had a relative risk of 1.65 (0.83 to 3.27). These risk estimates changed little after adjustment for age, smoking, hypertension, and alcohol intake.
Primary and secondary prevention trials
The possibility that aspirin might increase the risk of
intracerebral haemorrhage has been raised in two large primary
intervention studies and several large secondary prevention trials
among patients with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (table 4).
1 2 4-8 11 12 17-19
It has
been difficult, however, to draw firm conclusions about the extent and
nature of the relative risk owing to the small number of cases
observed, the diagnostic imprecision involved in clinically diagnosing
intracerebral haemorrhage, and the varying aspirin doses used.
Several studies included intracerebral haemorrhage within the category
of haemorrhagic stroke and are therefore likely to have included a
substantial number of individuals with haemorrhagic transformation
after an ischaemic stroke.
|
Advantages of study methodology
The case-control methodology used in our study has several
advantages over clinical trials or cohort studies. Firstly, the large
number of cases allows a substantially more precise estimate of the
relative risk than has previously been available. Our study would not
exclude a small increase in risk but no study design could achieve this.
Potential biases and confounding
As with all case-control studies, the results of our investigation
are potentially influenced by both bias and confounding. The most
significant of these is recall bias as the results depend largely on
subjects providing information about their past. To minimise the
differences between cases and controls, the questionnaire focused
mainly on retrieving simple information likely to be memorable to both
the subjects and their next of kin.
Clinical significance
The increased risk of intracerebral haemorrhage among users of
moderate to high doses of aspirin (>1225 mg/week) was based on a
small number of cases and only just reached statistical significance.
This finding should therefore be regarded as tentative and requiring
confirmation. It is also notable that the adjusted risk ratio was
similar regardless of whether or not a history of hypertension was
controlled for in the analysis. This suggests that any risk associated
with high doses of aspirin is unlikely to be confounded by interference
with blood pressure control.
Conclusion
Our study did not identify any meaningful increase in risk
of intracerebral haemorrhage among aspirin users overall or among low
dose aspirin users in particular. Although a statistically significant
threefold increase in risk was observed among users of high dose
aspirin, this finding should be regarded as tentative and requiring
confirmation. Fear of intracerebral haemorrhage should not therefore
discourage the use of low doses of aspirin for vascular prophylaxis
when it is otherwise indicated. Despite the reassurance provided by our
study, it should be emphasised that a proper assessment of the risks
and benefits of treatment with aspirin in low risk settings
for
example, for primary prevention
will only be established by large
clinical trials.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank Dr Judith Frayne (Alfred Hospital), Alan S Davis (Boxhill Hospital), R P Evans (Dandenong Hospital), Professor Stephen Cordner (coroner's offices), Denis R Hogg (Epworth Hospital), Dr Brian Chambers (Heidelberg Repatriation Hospital), Dr Malcolm Horne (Monash Medical Centre and Prince Henry's Hospital), Dr Alan S C Sandford (Preston and Northcote Hospital), Professor Stephen M Davis (Royal Melbourne Hospital), Mr J K Clarebrough (St Vincent's Private Hospital), Professor Edward Byrne (St Vincent's Hospital), and Dr Mary Stannard (Western Hospital) for assistance in recruiting patients from each centre, Belinda Muir, Annie Crowe, Fiona Ellery, and Judy Snaddon who conducted the majority of the interviews, and Lichun Quang for computer assistance.
Contributors: AGT participated in designing the study, was responsible for coordinating the study, participated in data collection, analysis of data, interpretation of findings, and writing of the paper. JJMcN and GAD initiated the formulation of the primary hypothesis, designed the protocol, and participated in the interpretation of findings and writing of the paper. AF contributed to the analysis of the data and edited the paper. AGT, JJMcN, and GAD will act as guarantors for the paper.
Funding: The Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, the Alfred Hospital Research Foundation, and the National Stroke Foundation.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(Accepted 1 July 1998)