ESPRIT study design and outcomes – a critical appraisal

ABSTRACT

Evidence is needed to guide therapeutic decisions on patients who had ischaemic cerebral events. The recently published European/Australasian Stroke Prevention in Reversible Ischaemia Trial (ESPRIT), an open-label randomised controlled study, compared long-term treatment of patients randomised to aspirin 30–325 mg daily with (n = 1363) or without (n = 1376) dipyridamole 200 mg twice daily. The study found the combination to be superior to aspirin alone (13% vs. 16% events in a composite endpoint of vascular death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or major bleeding; hazard ratio 0.8; 95% confidence interval 0.66–0.98). In the interpretation of the results, criticism has been raised related to the study design (open-label, change during the study), the study conduct (half of the aspirin patients underdosed, 33% drop-out rate in the combination group, missing information on potential confounders such as protective concomitant medication), and the outcomes (lack of differences in the efficacy outcomes between the intent-to-treat and the on-treatment populations, lack of differences in minor bleedings between treatment groups, borderline statistical significance of primary study endpoint). Further studies are needed to determine the place of aspirin/dipyridamole combinations in the secondary prevention of stroke.

Key words: :

• Aspirin
• Dipyridamole
• Ischaemic stroke
• Methodological issues
• Outcome study
• Secondary prevention