Explore the vast range of titles available.

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a contributor to embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Subgroup analyses from previous studies suggest that anticoagulation could reduce recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy. We hypothesised that anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, would reduce the risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke compared with aspirin among patients with PFO enrolled in the NAVIGATE ESUS trial. NAVIGATE ESUS was a double-blinded, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 459 centres in 31 countries that assessed the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban versus aspirin for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, cohorts with and without PFO were defined on the basis of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE). The primary efficacy outcome was time to recurrent ischaemic stroke between treatment groups. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding, according to the criteria of the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. The primary analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Additionally, we did a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of studies in which patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO were randomly assigned to receive anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy. Between Dec 23, 2014, and Sept 20, 2017, 7213 participants were enrolled and assigned to receive rivaroxaban (n=3609) or aspirin (n=3604). Patients were followed up for a mean of 11 months because of early trial termination. PFO was reported as present in 534 (7·4%) patients on the basis of either TTE or TOE. Patients with PFO assigned to receive aspirin had a recurrent ischaemic stroke rate of 4·8 events per 100 person-years compared with 2·6 events per 100 person-years in those treated with rivaroxaban. Among patients with known PFO, there was insufficient evidence to support a difference in risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke between rivaroxaban and aspirin (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54; 95% CI 0·22–1·36), and the risk was similar for those without known PFO (1·06; 0·84–1·33; pinteraction=0·18). The risks of major bleeding with rivaroxaban versus aspirin were similar in patients with PFO detected (HR 2·05; 95% CI 0·51–8·18) and in those without PFO detected (HR 2·82; 95% CI 1·69–4·70; pinteraction=0·68). The random-effects meta-analysis combined data from NAVIGATE ESUS with data from two previous trials (PICSS and CLOSE) and yielded a summary odds ratio of 0·48 (95% CI 0·24–0·96; p=0·04) for ischaemic stroke in favour of anticoagulation, without evidence of heterogeneity. Among patients with ESUS who have PFO, anticoagulation might reduce the risk of recurrent stroke by about half, although substantial imprecision remains. Dedicated trials of anticoagulation versus antiplatelet therapy or PFO closure, or both, are warranted. Bayer and Janssen.

One quarter to one third of patients eligible for systemic thrombolysis are on antiplatelet therapy at presentation. In this study, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis in stroke patients on prescribed antiplatelet therapy in the WAKE-UP trial. WAKE-UP was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to study the efficacy and safety of MRI-guided intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase in patients with an acute stroke of unknown onset time. The medication history of all patients randomized in the WAKE-UP trial was documented. The primary safety outcome was any sign of hemorrhagic transformation on follow-up MRI. The primary efficacy outcome was favorable functional outcome defined by a score of 0-1 on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days after stroke, adjusted for age and baseline stroke severity. Logistic regression models were fitted to study the association of prior antiplatelet treatment with outcome and treatment effect of intravenous alteplase. Of 503 randomized patients, 164 (32.6%) were on antiplatelet treatment. Patients on antiplatelet treatment were older (70.3 vs. 62.8 years,  <  0.001), and more frequently had a history of hypertension, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and hemorrhagic transformation on follow-up imaging did not differ between patients with and without antiplatelet treatment. Patients on prior antiplatelet treatment were less likely to achieve a favorable outcome (37.3% vs. 52.6%,  = 0.014), but there was no interaction of prior antiplatelet treatment with intravenous alteplase concerning favorable outcome (  = 0.355). Intravenous alteplase was associated with higher rates of favorable outcome in patients on prior antiplatelet treatment with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.106 (95% CI 1.047-4.236). Treatment benefit of intravenous alteplase and rates of post-treatment hemorrhagic transformation were not modified by prior antiplatelet intake among MRI-selected patients with unknown onset stroke. Worse functional outcome in patients on antiplatelets may result from a higher load of cardiovascular co-morbidities in these patients.

Costa Rica is a middle-income country with a strong governmental emphasis on human development. For more than half a century, its health policies have applied the principles of equity and solidarity to strengthen access to care through public services and universal social health insurance. Costa Rica’s population measures of health service coverage, health service use, and health status are excellent, and in the Americas, life expectancy in Costa Rica is second only to that in Canada. Many of these outcomes can be linked to the performance of the public health care system. However, the current emphasis of international aid organizations on privatization of health services threatens the accomplishments and universality of the Costa Rican health care system.

Maintained dedication to primary care has fostered a public health delivery system with exceptional outcomes in Costa Rica. For more than a decade, management commitments have been part of Costa Rican health reform. We assessed the effect of the Costa Rican management commitments on access and quality of care and on compliance with their intended objectives. We constructed seven hypotheses on opinions of primary care providers. Through a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach, we tested these hypotheses and interpreted the research findings. Management commitments consume an excessive proportion of consultation time, inflate recordkeeping, reduce comprehensiveness in primary care consultations, and induce a disproportionate consumption of hospital emergency services. Their formulation relies on norms in need of optimization, their control on unreliable sources. They also affect professionalism. In Costa Rica, management commitments negatively affect access and quality of care and pose a threat to the public service delivery system. The failures of this pay-for-performance-like initiative in an otherwise well-performing health system cast doubts on the appropriateness of pay-for-performance for health systems strengthening in less advanced environments.