[HSF] Aprotinin

psimha prasannasimha at gmail.com
Tue Nov 21 08:45:44 EST 2006


That was me.
Prasanna
Ben Bidstrup wrote:
>> Are you referring to 200 % burns ?
>
>
> Yup! Sorry I meant 200% burns !!
>
>> Prasanna
>> Ben Bidstrup wrote:
>>> If I and others actually knew why they 'withheld' information then I 
>>> would let you know. All I know is what has been said and that is 2 
>>> employees commissioned a group who undertook a study using 
>>> administrative databases to which they had access as their sources. 
>>> This is a retrospective, observational study. What were the entry 
>>> criteria, what were the end points what were the results, only they 
>>> know and apparently what was said to those wonderful peer reviewed 
>>> medical Journals we all read (well Hal does) the NY Times and WSJ. 
>>> These 2 employees now on gardening leave, did NOT inform their 
>>> superiors. I have spoken with many of the medical people who like me 
>>> have been associated with TrasylolÅ and Bayer for many years and who 
>>> were at the FDA meeting and they all were blindsided by this. Was it 
>>> a deliberate act -- maybe by the employees, but not by Bayer. As 
>>> soon as they (Bayer people) found out about it, they were as 
>>> disturbed as everyone else (including myself). Do I believe this? 
>>> Yes. I know and have worked with these people for over a decade and 
>>> I believe them. Would they put their jobs at risk by concealing 
>>> stuff. NO.
>>> Will this 'study' add to our body of evidence. Only time will tell. 
>>> But as an observational study with sourcing from administrative 
>>> databases, I can say that there are plenty of potential problems. 
>>> Look at this paper from Michael Mack's group looking at comparisons 
>>> between administrative and clinical datasets. (It will only show 
>>> associations, not cause and effect. If propensity scoring is used in 
>>> some way, it can only rely on collected co-variates. There is the 
>>> issue of allocation bias as I have discussed earlier. We will have 
>>> to wait and see what the FDA who have all the data (unlike the data 
>>> from Mangano, who might appear top be a good researcher but has 
>>> chosen to violate a basic principle of science of free access to the 
>>> data so that each and every reader can confirm independently the 
>>> analyses performed.)
>>> Now, using a PC and something like SPSS, you can get a series a 
>>> statistically significant figures on anything. I will quote directly 
>>> from the FDA transcript of the Advisory Board. Stan Young is an 
>>> independent statistician from the National Institute of Statistical 
>>> Science (p 102 of the afternoon transcript)
>>>
>>> "It's error only and not truth that shrinks from inquiry. So, 
>>> serious scientists should give up the dataset. They should give it 
>>> up to anyone that wants it and it should be in a form that people 
>>> can build on and understand and further the research that's in the 
>>> dataset. I'll turn and make a few comments on the analysis of 
>>> complex datasets. This is an area that I have worked on for maybe 20 
>>> years or so. There, in these particular datasets scientists tests 
>>> here responded, commented, there are multiple response questions. So 
>>> there's not one question here. The point of the human mind is we 
>>> focus on one thing at a time. But in the sweep through this dataset, 
>>> lots of questions are being asked. There are fairly standard ways to 
>>> adjust analysis for asking multiple questions and they should be 
>>> done. Responses can be combined in numerous ways. Sort of the 
>>> off-the-wall kind of a comment is attributed to Johnny van Noyman. 
>>> You give me four parameters and I can fit an elephant. You give me 
>>> five and I can make him wiggle his trunk. Okay? So with multiple 
>>> responses and being able to combine them in multiple ways, it's no 
>>> trick at all to get P values of .001, no trick at all. Any graduate 
>>> student given random data and a few hours on the computer can 
>>> produce results of that sort. P values can be moved many orders of 
>>> magnitude through analysis, manipulations. In exploratory analysis, 
>>> P values and risk ratios essentially have no meaning."
>>>
>>> Available from 
>>> http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/cder06.html#CardiovascularRenal
>>>
>>> In essence, data dredging in a post hoc manner (or rather in the 
>>> absence of an a priori plan for analysis) can tell you almost 
>>> anything. At best it will point you in the direction of a future 
>>> study to answer a specific question. To look at the DES issue, how 
>>> many times have we seen a subgroup analysis (post hoc) which then is 
>>> extrapolated to a much wider population and the cardiologists put 
>>> their hands on their hearts and state 'Look at the evidence.'
>>>
>>> Here endeth the lesson according to the Book of Ben, Ch 4, vs 7.
>>>
>>> Disclosure: Associated with TrasylolÅ for 21 years and still 
>>> supporting my research findings! I have been the recipient of funds 
>>> from Bayer to support my research in the past and have acted as a 
>>> speaker and consultant for which I have been at times remunerated.
>>>
>>> I have read that news article. It is the same issue. Risk vs 
>>> benefit. HM of those soldiers survive the initial insult only to die 
>>> of later complications. Novo 7 may get them over the first hurdle 
>>> whereas a few years ago they would not have got out of the initial 
>>> receiving aid station. These guys are being blasted by stuff causing 
>>> such massive trauma that cardiac surgery on bypass is like a walk in 
>>> the park. These soldiers are truly having the 'third degree burns' 
>>> to which Prasanna or Hal (correct me if I am wrong ) referred a few 
>>> months ago.
>>>
>>>> Ben,
>>>> Thanks for the link. FDA panel approved to keep the drug based on the
>>>> information here. What bothers me is why Bayer withheld information
>>>> about another study from FDA panel and announced within days after 
>>>> this.
>>>> I am afraid that this kind of behavior will get this drug off the
>>>> market. I still think Aprotinin is a very useful drug with some 
>>>> risk and
>>>> I continue to use it in select patients until it is taken off the
>>>> market.
>>>>
>>>> While the forum members were discussing the Aprotinin and Novoseven I
>>>> found an article in our Local news paper.
>>>> Here is the link for our local Newspaper article (Last Saturday) about
>>>> NOVOSEVEN(r)
>>>>
>>>> http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/living/health/16047224.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chand
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: openheart-l-bounces at lists.hsforum.com
>>>> [mailto:openheart-l-bounces at lists.hsforum.com] On Behalf Of Ben 
>>>> Bidstrup
>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:26 PM
>>>> To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>> Subject: RE: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>
>>>> http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/cder06.html#CardiovascularRenal
>>>>
>>>>>  > do you have a link?
>>>>>
>>>>> NFA
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: openheart-l-bounces at lists.hsforum.com [mailto:openheart-l-
>>>>>> bounces at lists.hsforum.com] On Behalf Of Michael Firstenberg
>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 7:20 PM
>>>>>> To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> do you have a link?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 19, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Ben Bidstrup wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  You might find it interesting to read the FDA transcript of the
>>>>>>>  Cardiovascular and Renal Advisory Board 21 September.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Please don't disparage Dennis Mangano too much. He is, or at
>>>>>>>>  least was, a
>>>>>>>>  very capable clinical cardiac anesthesiologist and is fully
>>>>>>>>  cognizant of all
>>>>>>>>  of the issues regarding intra-operative bleeding and post-
>>>>>>>>  operative care of
>>>>>>>>  cardiac surgery patients. That explains Dennis' consistent
>>>>>>>>  ability to focus
>>>>>>>>  and publish provocatively on real life issues that confronting
>>>>>>>>  surgeons and
>>>>>>>>  anesthesiologists on a day to day basis. The methodology of his
>>>>>>>>  paper in
>>>>>>>>  the NEJM is open to question. Dr. Mangano's credentials are not!
>>>>>>>>  Fraser Keith
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>  From: openheart-l-bounces at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>>  [mailto:openheart-l-bounces at lists.hsforum.com] On Behalf Of
>>>> Michael
>>>>>>  >> Firstenberg
>>>>>>>>  Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:18 AM
>>>>>>>>  To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>>  Subject: Re: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  If I recall Mangino is not a surgeon - in fact is he not an
>>>>>>>>  anesthesiologist, as are many of the people who recently write
>>>>>>>>  these articles about "bad cardiac drugs"? Has he actually had to
>>>>>>>>  stand at the foot of a bed or in the OR for countless hours
>>>>>>>>  watching patient bleed to death and deal first hand with the
>>>>  >> >> consequences of massive transfusions. Yes, renal failure and
>>>>>>  >> dialysis is bad bad bad - but compare that with right heart
>>>>>>>>  failure/ARDS/massive pressor requirements/etc from excessive
>>>>>>>>  bleeding (and the hypotension and associated ATN/renal failure
>>>>>>>>  anyhow). My guess is he is home in bed all nice an cozy with his
>>>>  >> >> pager off at the end of his shift.
>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>>  -michael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On Nov 19, 2006, at 2:24 AM, Ani Anyanwu wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Well many would I suspect call it unbridled.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  The following would generally receive aprotinin in my
>>>> institution
>>>>>>  >>> 1) reoperations
>>>>>>>>>  2) operations on the aortic arch or descending aorta
>>>>>>>>>  3) transplant and VAD procedures
>>>>>>>>>  4) operations on patients on clopidogrel
>>>>>>>>>  5) combined valvular and CABG
>>>>>>>>>  6) Patients with renal impairment
>>>>>>>>>  7) Patients where ability to tolerate transfusion or bleeding
>>>>>>>>>  complications is thought to be marginal including - most
>>>>>>>>>  patients aged 70 or above, patients with severe lung disease,
>>>>>>>>>  poor LV function, severe pulmonary hypertension, multiple
>>>>>>>>>  comorbidity etc. Certainly almost all octogenrians would get
>>>>>>>>>  aprotinin - even for CABG.
>>>>>  > >>> 8) Paradoxically, young patients in their 20s or 30s (where
>>>>>>  >>> avoidance of blood transfusion should be the goal in all
>>>> patients)
>>>>>>  >>> 9) Multiple valvular procedures (excluding tricuspid valve)
>>>>>>>>>  10) cases with anticipated bypass run more than 3 hours
>>>>>>>>>  (including complex mitral repairs)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  As you can see there is not much left - so maybe it is
>>>>>>>>>  unbridled! As you implied we obviously would not use it for an
>>>>>>>>>  ASD or isolated AVR, but these constitute a small minority of
>>>>>>>>>  our procedures. Personally I would use it for practically every
>>>>>>>>>  operation - including all CABGs - but that is a personal
>>>> opinion
>>>>>>  >>> as I believe there are non-hematological benefits of the drug
>>>>>>>>>  and like you
>>>>>>>>  > strongly believe in blood conservation. I do not have any
>>>>>>>>  interests
>>>>>>>>>  or links to industry.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Actually Ben brought up something that I had never thought of -
>>>>>  > >>> correct me if I am wrong but Aprotinin is the only agent
>>>>>>  >>> licensed as a blood conservation agent for heart surgery?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Ani
>>>>>>>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>  From: psimha<mailto:prasannasimha at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>  To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com>
>>>>>>>>>  Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 12:00 AM
>>>>>>>>>  Subject: Re: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Ani - are you really using it "unbridled" or liberally ? Do
>>>>>>>>>  you use it
>>>>>>>>>  for an ASD or for a straight forward valve replacement ? or
>>>>>>>>>  any other
>>>>>>>>>  case with a short bypass run ?
>>>>>>>>>  I did not say I will not use it in a redo - in fact if you
>>>>>>>>>  note my
>>>>>>>>>  original post I said I did use it in redo's ?
>>>>>>>>>  And Yes , I believe very strongly in blood conservation and
>>>>>>>>>  believe that
>>>>>>>>>  Aprotinin is one (and not the only ) cog in the wheel.
>>>>>>>>  > Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Ani Anyanwu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>  Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  We use aprotinin in an unbridled way and are certainly yet to
>>>>>>>>>>  see this price.
>>>>>>>>>>  - we have no more an incidence of renal failure than other
>>>>>>>>>>  institutions have (this we know because incidence of dialysis
>>>>>>>>>>  postop in all New York Hospitals is tracked by the State
>>>>>>>>>>  Department of Health)
>>>>>>>>>>  - we have no suggestion of an increase in early vein graft
>>>>>>>>>>  thrombosis (this should transform into higher periop MI and
>>>>>>>>>>  mortality, our CABG mortality rate has remained around 1.5%
>>>> last
>>>>>>  >>>> 3 years)
>>>>>>>>>>  - we have not experienced any adverse events that caused us to
>>>>>>>>>>  be concerned about its use, except fatal thrombosis in 2
>>>>>>>>>>  patients with Factor V Lieden deficiency having circulatory
>>>>  >> >>>> arrest so we now routinely screen for this defect in all
>>>>>>  >>>> circulatory arrest cases.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  The price we are paying is a low incidence of transfusion of
>>>>>>>>>>  blood products and a low re-exploration rate (<2% last 2 years
>>>>>>>>>>  even with 18% being redos and almost 20% aortic cases). Maybe
>>>>  >> >>>> there are other unknown adverse effects which will catch up
>>>>>>  >>>> with us, but for know they are unknown (and we wont be
>>>>>>>>>>  responsible; remember it is the drug companies not doctors
>>>>>>>>>>  being sued for COX2 inhibitors).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Maybe when Mangano is bored he might do another study, and
>>>>>>>>>>  then what will you do? For those who use Amicar, how do we
>>>>>>>>>>  really know it is any safer - the drug is not even licensed
>>>> for
>>>>>>  >>>> human use in many European countries. Perhaps even his next
>>>>>>>>>>  study will be on morbidity of plasma and platelet
>>>>>>>>>>  transfusions....then what will we do?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Ani
>>>>>>>>>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>  From:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> prasannasimha<mailto:prasannasimha at gmail.com<mailto:prasannasimha at g
>>>>>>  >>>> ma
>>>>>>>>>>  il.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>  To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 9:37 PM
>>>>>>>>>>  Subject: Re: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  The thing I want to say is that be it Vioxx /
>>>> Aprotinin/blood/
>>>>>  > >>>> Oxygen -
>>>>>>  >>>> they are all drugs and have effects and side effects. The
>>>>>>>>>>  present mess
>>>>>>>>>>  that the pharmacological companies are in is just because of
>>>>>>>>>>  their
>>>>>>>>>>  unbridled enthusiasm (or greed) to ,make a quick buck and it
>>>>>>>>>>  backfires
>>>>>>>>>>  on them. COX2 Inhibitors have a specific role unfortunately
>>>>>>>>>>  I even saw
>>>>>>>>>>  my dentist prescribing it for tooth pain !! Who marketed it
>>>>>>>>>>  to him as a
>>>>>>>>>>  good NSAID ? I told him about the literature and my
>>>>>>>>>>  concerns (this was
>>>>>>>>>>  prior to Vioxx) . They were trying to market Valdecoxib for
>>>>>>>>>>  post cardiac
>>>>>>>>>>  surgery pain !!_ and I told them you should not be doing
>>>> that
>>>>>>  >>>> - but did
>>>>>>>>>>  they listen ? and bang in a few months a controversy breaks
>>>>>>>>>>  out. The
>>>>>>>>>>  wife of colleague of mine was taking valdecoxib sample (she
>>>>>  > >>>> is a Doctor
>>>>>>  >>>> too) as the sample was around and the premenopausal lady
>>>>>>>>>>  ended up with a
>>>>>>>>>>  coronary thrombosis !!
>>>>>>>>>>  Every drug has a role and an indication based on good
>>>>>>>>>>  clinical judgment
>>>>>>>>  >> - unfortunately we pay the price when its use is unbridled.
>>>>>>>>>>  Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> hgrmd at aol.com<mailto:hgrmd at aol.com<mailto:hgrmd at aol.com<mailto:hgrm
>>>>>>>>>>  d@
>>>>>>>>>>  aol.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>  Prasanna and Ajit,
>>>>>>>>>>>  At the risk of great bodily harm from Ben, Ani, and others,
>>>>>>>>>>>  I again think the use of aprotinin should be limited as much
>>>>>>>>>>>  as possible. I know there are cases where the benefit
>>>>>>>>>>>  seemingly outweighs the risk. However, the mounting
>>>>>>>>>>>  literature against it is becoming increasingly compelling.
>>>> In
>>>>>>  >>>>> addition, my own impression, made years before any of this
>>>>>>>>>>>  came out, was that the drug increased the risk of ATN. I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>  also convinced that this has the potential to be the Vioxx of
>>>>>>>>>>>  cardiac surgery. All I can say is you guys who continue to
>>>>>>>>>>>  indiscriminantly use it have got some really big ones.
>>>>>>>>>>>  Hal
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>  From:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> prasannasimha at gmail.com<mailto:prasannasimha at gmail.com<mailto:pras
>>>>>>  >>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>  nasimha at gmail.com<mailto:prasannasimha at gmail.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  To: OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>  >>> L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Sent: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 1:00 PM
>>>>  >> >>>>> Subject: Re: [HSF] Aprotinin
>>>>>>  >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Very Sorry used Aprotinin on my redo - can't help using it
>>>>>>>>>>>  selectively !!
>>>>>>>>>>>  Prasanna
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Ajit Damle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Journal club critique >
>>>>>>>>>>>> A disheartening story: Aprotinin in cardiac surgery >
>>>>  >> >>>>>> Lien M, Milbrandt E
>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Critical Care, 2006 10:317 ( 8 November 2006 )
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Journal club critique
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A disheartening story: Aprotinin in cardiac surgery
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Marcus Lien1 and Eric B Milbrandt2 >
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1Clinical Fellow, Department of Critical Care Medicine,
>>>>>>>>>>>> University of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2Assistant Professor, Department of Critical Care Medicine,
>>>>>>>>>>>> University of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Critical Care 2006, 10:317 doi:10.1186/cc5072
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Evidence based medicine journal club critique edited by E B
>>>>>>>>>>>> Milbrant
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The electronic version of this article is the complete one
>>>>>>>>>>>> and can be found
>>>>>>>>>>>> online at: http://ccforum.com/content/10/6/317<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>> ccforum.com/content/10/6/317<http://ccforum.com/content/
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10/6/317<http://ccforum.com/content/10/6/317>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Published 8 November 2006 >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> C 2006 BioMed Central Ltd
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Citation
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mangano DT, Tudor IC, Dietzel C: The risk associated with
>>>>>  > >>>>>> aprotinin in
>>>>>>  >>>>>> cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med 2006, 354:353-365 [1].
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Background
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The majority of patients undergoing surgical treatment for
>>>> ST-
>>>>>>  >>>>>> elevation
>>>>>>>>>>>> myocardial infarction receive antifibrinolytic therapy to
>>>>>>>>>>>> limit blood loss.
>>>>>>>>>>>> This approach appears counterintuitive to the accepted
>>>>>>>>>>>> medical treatment of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the same condition - namely, fibrinolysis to limit
>>>>>>>>>>>> thrombosis. Despite this
>>>>>>>>>>>> concern, no independent, large-scale safety assessment has
>>>>>>>>>>>> been undertaken.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Methods
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Design and setting
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Prospective observational cohort study in 69 institutions in
>>>>>>>>>>>> North and South
>>>>>>>>>>>> America, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>  > >>>>>>
>>>>>>  >>>>>> Subjects
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4374 patients undergoing coronary-artery revascularization.
>>>>>>>>>>>> All patients
>>>>>>>>>>>> were >18 years old and completed a pre-surgery interview.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Patients were
>>>>>>>>>>>> classified as undergoing primary surgery (no previous heart
>>>>>>>>>>>> surgery and no
>>>>>>>>>>>> other surgery besides a coronary artery bypass graft), or
>>>>>>>>>>>> complex surgery
>>>>>>>>>>>> (all other surgery).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Intervention
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> None.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Measurements
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The authors prospectively assessed three agents (aprotinin
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1295 patients],
>>>>>>>>>>>> aminocaproic acid [883], and tranexamic acid [822]) as
>>>>>>>>>>>> compared with no
>>>>>>>>>>>> agent (1374 patients) with regard to serious cardiovascular,
>>>>>>>>  >>>> renal, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> cerebrovascular outcomes by propensity and multivariable
>>>>>>>>>>>> methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Results
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In propensity-adjusted, multivariable logistic regression
>>>> (C-
>>>>>>  >>>>>> index, 0.72),
>>>>>>>>>>>> use of aprotinin was associated with a doubling in the risk
>>>>>>>>>>>> of renal failure
>>>>>>>>>>>> requiring dialysis among patients undergoing complex
>>>> coronary-
>>>>>>  >>>>>> artery surgery
>>>>>>>>>>>> (odds ratio, 2.59; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.36 to
>>>>  >> >>>>>> 4.95) or primary
>>>>>>  >>>>>> surgery (odds ratio, 2.34; 95 percent confidence interval,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.27 to 4.31).
>>>>>>>>>>>> Similarly, use of aprotinin in the latter group was
>>>>>>>>>>>> associated with a 55
>>>>>>>>>>>> percent increase in the risk of myocardial infarction or
>>>>>>>>>>>> heart failure (P <
>>>>  >> >>>>>> 0.001) and a 181 percent increase in the risk of stroke or
>>>>>>  >>>>>> encephalopathy (P
>>>>>>>>>>>> = 0.001). Neither aminocaproic acid nor tranexamic acid was
>>>>>>>>>>>> associated with
>>>>>>>>>>>> an increased risk of renal, cardiac, or cerebral events.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Adjustment
>>>>>>>>>>>> according to propensity score for the use of any one of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> three agents as
>>>>>>>>>>>> compared with no agent yielded nearly identical findings.
>>>> All
>>>>>>  >> >>>> the agents
>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced blood loss.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Conclusion
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The association between aprotinin and serious end-organ
>>>>>>>>>>>> damage indicates
>>>>>>>>>>>> that continued use is not prudent. In contrast, the less
>>>>>>>>>>>> expensive generic
>>>>>>>>>>>> medications aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid are safe
>>>>>>>>>>>> alternatives.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The medical and surgical approaches to acute ST-elevation
>>>>>>>>>>>> myocardial
>>>>>>>>>>>> infarction present an interesting paradox. The medical
>>>>>>>>>>>> approach focuses on
>>>>>>>>>>>> fibrinolytic therapy. Due to concerns over bleeding, the
>>>>>>>>>>>> surgical approach
>>>>>>>>>>>> avoids fibrinolytic agents and instead uses agents that
>>>>>>>>>>>> mitigate bleeding,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so called antifibrinolytic agents, which include aprotinin,
>>>>>>>>>>>> aminocaproic
>>>>>>>>>>>> acid, and tranexamic acid. These agents were generally
>>>>>>>>>>>> considered safe based
>>>>>>>>>>>> on a number of secondary analyses of studies that were not
>>>>>>>>>>>> primarily
>>>>>>>>>>>> intended to assess safety. These relatively small studies
>>>>>  > >>>>>> were underpowered
>>>>>>  >>>>>> to detect adverse events and did not involve head-to-head
>>>>>>>>>>>> comparisons of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> commonly used antifibrinolytic agents. Animal studies
>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest that these
>>>>>>>>>>>> agents have the potential to cause ischemic damage to
>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple organ systems
>>>>>>  >>>>>> and small, largely single-center studies have suggested
>>>>>>>>>>>> increased graft
>>>>>>>>>>>> thrombosis and renal dysfunction [2-6]. Ideally, the safety
>>>>>>>>>>>> of these agents
>>>>>>>>>>>> would be compared in a large, multi-center, randomized
>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>> However, because their use is embedded in practice and
>>>>>>>>>>>> because regulatory
>>>>>>>>>>>> approval of these agents differs by country, conducting such
>>>>>>>>>>>> a trial will be
>>>>>>>>>>>> difficult if not impossible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To address the safety of these agents for cardiopulmonary
>>>>>  > >>>>>> bypass surgery,
>>>>>>  >>>>>> Mangano and colleagues [1] conducted a large, prospective,
>>>>>>>>>>>> observational
>>>>>>>>>>>> cohort assessing aprotinin, aminocaproic acid, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> tranexamic acid as
>>>>>>>>>>>> compared to no agent in 4374 patients undergoing
>>>>>>>>>>>> revascularization. Because
>>>>>>>>>>>> this was a prospective study, the authors were able to
>>>>>>>>>>>> collect a wealth of
>>>>>>>>>>>> clinical information, including approximately 7500 data
>>>>>>>>>>>> fields per patient.
>>>>>>>>>>>> This permitted consideration of variables that might
>>>>>>>>>>>> influence both choice
>>>>>>>>>>>> of antifibrinolytic agent and clinical outcome. The authors
>>>>>>>>>>>> used a
>>>>>>>>>>>> propensity score based on 45 treatment-selection covariates
>>>> and
>>>>>>  >>>>>> multivariable modeling to control for baseline differences
>>>>>>>>>>>> between groups.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In doing so, they found that aprotinin, but not aminocaproic
>>>>>>>>>>>> acid or
>>>>>>>>>>>> tranexamic acid, was associated with serious cardiovascular,
>>>>>>>>>>>> renal, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> cerebrovascular adverse events. Furthermore, a dose-response
>>>>>>>>>>>> relationship
>>>>  >> >>>>>> was demonstrated, strengthening the inference of causality.
>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The main weakness of this study is that the authors failed
>>>> to
>>>>>>  >> >>>> report details
>>>>>>>>>>>> of the surgery itself, such as whether the surgery was on
>>>>>>>>>>>> vs. off-pump, time
>>>>>>>>>>>> on pump, and number of vessels bypassed. These variables are
>>>>  >> >>>>>> likely to
>>>>>>  >>>>>> influence not only choice of antifibrinolytic agent but also
>>>>>>>>>>>> outcome, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> are, therefore, a source of indication bias that could
>>>>>>>>>>>> reflect unfavorably
>>>>>>>>>>>> on aprotinin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Based on the results of this study and those of another
>>>>>>>>>>>> observational study
>>>>>>>>>>>> suggesting renal toxicity [7], the United States Food and
>>>> Drug
>>>>>>  >>>>>> Administration (FDA) held an advisory committee meeting
>>>>>>>>>>>> September 21, 2006
>>>>>>>>>>>> to consider the cardiovascular safety of aprotinin. Because
>>>>>>>>>>>> of concerns
>>>>>>>>>>>> about the methodology of the study by Mangano and colleagues
>>>>>>>>>>>> and because it
>>>>>>>>>>>> was the only study to suggest cardiovascular adverse events
>>>>>>>>>>>> [8], the
>>>>>>>>>>>> advisory committee concluded that there was insufficient
>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence to support
>>>>>>>>>>>> changing the cardiovascular safety labeling of the drug.
>>>>>>>>>>>> However, just six
>>>>>>>>>>>> days after the committee met, it was revealed that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> drug's manufacturer,
>>>>>>>>  >>>> Bayer, had preliminary results from an observational study
>>>> of
>>>>>>  >>>>>> 67,000 cardiac
>>>>>>>>>>>> bypass patients that suggested aprotinin was associated with
>>>>>>>>>>>> increased risk
>>>>>>>>>>>> of death, renal dysfunction, congestive heart failure, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> stroke [9]. The
>>>>>>>>>>>> FDA subsequently issued a statement indicating it was
>>>> unaware
>>>>>>  >>>>>> of this study
>>>>>>>>>>>> when the advisory committee met and that it is evaluating
>>>>>>>>>>>> the results of
>>>>>>>>>>>> this study and the potential implications for the use of
>>>>>>>>>>>> aprotinin [10]. In
>>>>>>>>>>>> the mean time, the FDA suggests that physicians who use
>>>>>>>>>>>> aprotinin should
>>>>>  > >>>>>> carefully monitor patients for the occurrence of toxicity,
>>>>>>  >>>>>> particularly to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the kidneys, heart, or brain, and promptly report observed
>>>>>>>>>>>> adverse events.
>>>>>>>>>>>> They go on to recommend that physicians should consider
>>>>>>>>>>>> limiting aprotinin
>>>>>>>>>>>> use to those situations where the clinical benefit of
>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced blood loss is
>>>>>>>>>>>> essential to medical management of the patient and outweighs
>>>>>>>>>>>> the potential
>>>>>>>>>>>> risks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Recommendation >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The weight of evidence suggests that aprotinin increases the
>>>>>>  >>>>>> risk for a poor
>>>>>>>>>>>> outcome among patients undergoing cardiac operations. Not
>>>>>>>>>>>> only is this drug
>>>>>>>>>>>> very expensive, it seems to be toxic. Although the risk of
>>>>>>>>>>>> excessive
>>>>>>>>>>>> bleeding is certainly a cause for concern in certain
>>>>>>>>>>>> patients, and treatment
>>>>>  > >>>>>> with aprotinin can decrease blood loss in selected
>>>> patients,
>>>>>>  >>>>>> data are
>>>>>>>>>>>> lacking to show that administration of this agent actually
>>>>>>>>>>>> improves
>>>>>>>>>>>> survival.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Competing interests
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Mangano DT, Tudor IC, Dietzel C: The risk associated with
>>>>>>>>>>>> aprotinin in
>>>>>>>>>>>> cardiac surgery.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> N Engl J Med 2006, 354:353-365. >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Cosgrove DM III, Heric B, Lytle BW, Taylor PC, Novoa R,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Golding LA,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Stewart RW, McCarthy PM, Loop FD: Aprotinin therapy for
>>>>>>>>>>>> reoperative
>>>>>>>>>>>> myocardial revascularization: a placebo-controlled study.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ann Thorac Surg 1992, 54:1031-1036.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. D'Ambra MN, Akins CW, Blackstone EH, Bonney SL, Cohn LH,
>>>>  >> >>>>>> Cosgrove DM,
>>>>>>  >>>>>> Levy JH, Lynch KE, Maddi R: Aprotinin in primary valve
>>>>>>>>>>>> replacement and
>>>>>>>>>>>> reconstruction: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-
>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996, 112:1081-1089
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Feindt PR, Walcher S, Volkmer I, Keller HE, Straub U,
>>>>  >> >>>>>> Huwer H, Seyfert
>>>>>>  >>>>>> UT, Petzold T, Gams E: Effects of high-dose aprotinin on
>>>>>>>>>>>> renal function in
>>>>>>>>>>>> aortocoronary bypass grafting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ann Thorac Surg 1995, 60:1076-1080 >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Sundt TM III, Kouchoukos NT, Saffitz JE, Murphy SF,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wareing TH, Stahl
>>>>>>>>>>>> DJ: Renal dysfunction and intravascular coagulation with
>>>>>>>>>>>> aprotinin and
>>>>>>>>>>>> hypothermic circulatory arrest.
>>>>>>>>  >>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ann Thorac Surg 1993, 55:1418-1424 >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. Umbrain V, Christiaens F, Camu F: Intraoperative coronary
>>>>>>>>>>>> thrombosis:
>>>>>>>>>>>> can aprotinin and protamine be incriminated?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 1994, 8:198-201 >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 7. Karkouti K, Beattie WS, Dattilo KM, McCluskey SA, Ghannam
>>>>>>>>>>>> M, Hamdy A,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wijeysundera DN, Fedorko L, Yau TM: A propensity score case-
>>>>>>>>>>>> control
>>>>>>>>>>>> comparison of aprotinin and tranexamic acid in
>>>> high-transfusion-
>>>>>>  >>>>>> risk cardiac
>>>>>>>>>>>> surgery.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Transfusion 2006, 46:327-338 >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 8. Hughes S: Aprotinin safety again in spotlight as new
>>>>>>>>>>>> study suggests
>>>>>>>>>>>> increased cardiac events.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/545400<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.medscape.com/viewarticle/545400<http://www.medscape.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> viewarticle/545400<http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/
>>>>>>>>>>>> 545400>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> October 2, 2006 >
>>>>>>>>>>>> 9. Harris G: FDA says Bayer failed to reveal drug risk
>>>> study.
>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/30/health/30fda.html] New
>>>>>>>>>>>> York Times >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10. US Food and Drug Administration: FDA Public Health
>>>>>>>>>>>> Advisory: Aprotinin
>>>>>>>>>>>> Injection (marketed as Trasylol).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> [http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/aprotinin20060929.htm] >
>>>>>>  >> >>>> September 29, 2006 >
>>>>>  > >>>>>>
>>>>>>  >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>>>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>> L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>> L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view
>>>> archives:
>>>>>>  >>>>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>> mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/
>>>>>>>>>>>> listinfo/
>>>>>>>>>>>> openheart-l>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the policies and > disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://
>>>>>>  >>>>>> www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim>>
>>>>>  > >>>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>  >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>  mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/
>>>>>>  >>>>> openheart-l>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>  >> >>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to
>>>>>>  >>>>> the policies and disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>  listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>  www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>  >> __________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>  >>>>> __
>>>>>>>>>>>  ____
>>>>>>>>>>>  Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety
>>>>>>>>>>>  and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality
>>>>>>>>>>>  videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
>>>>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>>>  mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/
>>>>>>  >>>>> openheart-l>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to
>>>>>>>>>>>  the policies and
>>>>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>  listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://
>>>>>>>>  >>> www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view
>>>> archives:
>>>>>>  >>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>>  mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/
>>>>>>  >>>> openheart-l>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to
>>>>>>>>>>  the policies and
>>>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>>  > >>>> listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://
>>>>>>  >>>> www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim>>
>>>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>>  mmp.cjp.com/
>>>>>>>>  >> mailman/listinfo/openheart-l>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>>>>>>>>  policies and
>>>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>>>>>>>  listdisclaim>
>>>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>  > >>>
>>>>>>  >>> Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com<mailto:OpenHeart-
>>>>>>>>>  L at lists.hsforum.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l<http://
>>>>>>>>>  mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l>
>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to
>>>>>>>>>  the policies and
>>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim<http://www.hsforum.com/
>>>>  >> >>> listdisclaim>
>>>>>>  >>> -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>  >> >>>
>>>>>>  >>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>>>>>>>  policies and
>>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>>>>>>  policies and
>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>>>>>>  policies and
>>>>>>>>  disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  --
>>>>>>>  Ben Bidstrup FRACS FRCSEd FEBCTS
>>>>>>>  Consultant Cardiothoracic Surgeon
>>>>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Send postings to:
>>>>>>>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>>>>>  policies and disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>>>>  -----------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send postings to:
>>>>>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
>>>> policies
>>>>> and
>>>>>> disclaimers posted at:
>>>>>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>> Send postings to:
>>>>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>>
>>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the 
>>>>> policies
>>>> and
>>>>> disclaimers posted at:
>>>>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Ben Bidstrup FRACS FRCSEd FEBCTS
>>>> Consultant Cardiothoracic Surgeon
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Send postings to:
>>>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>
>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>
>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the 
>>>> policies
>>>> and
>>>> disclaimers posted at:
>>>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Send postings to:
>>>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>>>
>>>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>>>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>>>
>>>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the 
>>>> policies and
>>>> disclaimers posted at:
>>>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>>>> -----------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>>
>> Send postings to:
>> OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>>
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
>> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>>
>> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the 
>> policies and disclaimers posted at:
>> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
>> -----------------------------------------
>
>



More information about the OpenHeart-L mailing list