Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Пероральный аспирин в лечении венозных язв ног

Collapse all Expand all

References

References to studies included in this review

del Río Solá 2012 {published data only}

del Río Solá ML,  Antonio J,  Fajardo G,  Vaquero Puerta C. Influence of aspirin therapy in the ulcer associated with chronic venous insufficiency. Annals of Vascular Surgery 2012;26(5):620‐9.

Layton 1994 {published data only}

Layton AM,  Ibbotson SH,  Davies JA,  Goodfield MJ. Randomised trial of oral aspirin for chronic venous leg ulcers. Lancet 1994;16(344):164‐5.

References to studies excluded from this review

Ibbotson 1995 {published data only}

Ibbotson SH,  Layton AM,  Davies JA,  Goodfield MJ. The effect of aspirin on haemostatic activity in the treatment of chronic venous leg ulceration. British Journal of Dermatology 1995;132(3):422‐6.

References to ongoing studies

ACTRN12614000293662 {unpublished data only}

ACTRN12614000293662. Clinical effectiveness of aspirin as an adjunct to compression therapy in healing chronic venous leg ulcers: a randomised double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial [the ASPiVLU study]. https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=365858 (accessed 27 January 2016).

NCT02158806 {unpublished data only}

NCT02158806. Low Dose Aspirin for Venous Leg Ulcers (Aspirin4VLU). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02158806 (accessed 27 January 2016).

NCT02333123 {unpublished data only}

NCT02333123. Aspirin for Venous Ulcers: Randomised Trial (AVURT). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02333123 (accessed 27 January 2016).

Additional references

Arnoldi 1968

Arnoldi CC, Linderholm H. On the pathogenesis of the venous leg ulcer. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica 1968;134(6):427‐40.

Ballard 2000

Ballard JL, Bergan JJ, Sparks S. Pathogenesis of chronic venous insufficiency. In: Ballard JL, Bergan JJ editor(s). Chronic Venous Insufficiency: Diagnosis and Treatment. New York: Springer, 2000:17‐24.

Barron 2007

Barron G, Jacob S, Kirsner R. Dermatologic complications of chronic venous disease: medical management and beyond. Annals of Vascular Surgery 2007;21(5):652‐62.

Beebe‐Dimmer 2005

Beebe‐Dimmer JL, Pfeifer JR, Engle JS, Schottenfeld D. The epidemiology of chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins. Annals of Epidemiology 2005;15(3):175‐84.

Bergan 2007

Bergan J, Schmid‐Schonbein G, Coleridge Smith P, Nicolaides A, Boisseau M, Eklof B. Chronic venous disease. Minerva Cardioangiology 2007;55(4):459‐76.

Blankensteijn 2009

Blankensteijn JD, Philip D. Leg ulcer treatment. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2009;49:804‐8.

Bobek 1966

Bobek K, Cajzl L, Cepelak V, Slaisova V, Opatzny K, Barcal R. Study of phlebological disease frequency and the influence of etiologic factors [Étude de la fréquence des maladies phlébologiques et de l'influence de quelques facteurs étiologiques]. Phébologie 1966;19:217‐30.

Burke 2006

Burke A, Smith E, FitzGerald GA. Analgesics and antipyretics [Analgésicos e antipiréticos]. In: Goodman , Gilman editor(s). As Bases Farmacológicas da Terapêutica. Rio de Janeiro: McGraw‐Hill Interamericana do Brasil, 2006:601‐31.

Callam 1987

Callam MJ, Harper DR, Dale JJ, Ruckley CV. Chronic ulcer of the leg: clinical history. British Medical Journal 1987;294(6584):1389‐91.

Cappelleri 1995

Cappelleri JC, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Chalmers TC. Efficacy and safety of different aspirin dosages on vascular diseases in high‐risk patients. A metaregression analysis. Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials 1995;March 14:doc. no. 174. [PUBMED: 7889238]

CONSORT 2010

CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). http://www.consort‐statement.org/downloads/consort‐statement (accessed 27 January 2016).

Coon 1973

Coon WE, Willis PW, Keller JB. Venous thromboembolism and other venous disease in the Tecumseh community health study. Circulation 1973;48:406‐9.

Dalen 2006

Dalen JE. Aspirin to prevent heart attack and stroke: what's the right dose?. American Journal of Medicine 2006;119(3):198‐202.

De Araujo 2003

De Araujo T, Valencia IC, Federman DG, Kirsner RS. Managing the patient with venous ulcers. Annals of Internal Medicine 2003;138:326‐34.

Dealey 2005

Dealey C. The Care of Wounds: a Guide for Nurses. UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2005:143‐58.

Deeks 2011

Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG, on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (Editors). Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analysis. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Dorland 2007

Dorland WAN. Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary. 1st Edition. Saunders, 2007.

Falabella 1998

Falabella A, Carson P, Eaglstein W, Falanga V. The safety and efficacy of a proteolytic ointment in the treatment of chronic ulcers of the lower extremity. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 1998;39(5):737‐40.

Friedman 1990

Friedman SA. The diagnosis and medical management of vascular ulcers. Clinics in Dermatology 1990;8(3‐4):30‐9.

Gilliland 1991

Gilliland EL, Wolfe JH. Leg ulcers. BMJ 1991;303(6805):776‐9.

Higgins 2011a

Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ. Chapter 7:  Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011 . Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org. Wiley‐Blackwell.

Higgins 2011b

Higgins JPT, Altman DG, on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group (Editors). Chapter 8:  Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Jones 2008

Jones JE, Robinson J, Barr W, Carlisle C. Impact of exudate and odour from chronic venous leg ulceration. Nursing Standard 2008;22(45):53‐8.

Jull 2007

Jull AB, Arroll B, Parag V, Waters J. Pentoxifylline for treating venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001733.pub2]

Kamber 1978

Kamber V, Widmer LK, Munst G. Prevalence. In: Widmer LK editor(s). Peripheral Venous Disorders: Prevalence and Socio‐Medical Importance. Bern: Hans Huber Publishers, 1978:43‐50.

Lefebvre 2011

Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J, on behalf of the Cochrane Information Retrieval Methods Group. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Maffei 1986

Maffei FH, Magaldi C, Pinho SZ, Lastoria S, Pinho W, Yoshida WB, et al. Varicose veins and chronic venous insufficiency in Brazil: prevalence among 1755 inhabitants of a country town. Journal of Epidemiology 1986;15(2):210‐7.

Margolis 2002

Margolis D, Bilker W, Santanna J, Baumgarten M. Venous leg ulcer: incidence and prevalence in the elderly. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2002;46(3):381‐6.

Mayer 1994

Mayer W, Jochmann W, Partsch H. Varicose ulcer: healing in conservative therapy. A prospective study. Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift 1994;144(10‐11):250‐2.

Moloney 2004

Moloney M, Grace P. Understanding the underlying causes of chronic leg ulceration. Journal of Wound Care 2004;13:215‐8.

O'Meara 2012

O'Meara S, Cullum N, Nelson EA, Dumville JC. Compression for venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000265.pub3]

O'Rourke 1989

O'Rourke K, Detsky AS. Meta‐analysis in medical research: strong encouragement for higher quality in individual research efforts. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989;42(10):1021‐4.

Olin 1999

Olin JW, Beusterien KM, Childs MB, Seavey C, McHugh L, Griffiths RI. Medical costs of treating venous stasis ulcers: evidence from a retrospective cohort study. Vascular Medicine 1999;4(1):1‐7.

Philips 1994

Phillips T, Stanton B, Provan A, Lew R. A study of the impact of leg ulcers on quality of life: financial, social, and psychologic implications. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 1994;31(1):49‐53.

Rafetto 2009

Raffetto JD. Dermal pathology, cellular biology and inflammation in chronic venous disease. Thrombosis Research 2009;123:66‐71.

Raju 2009

Raju S, Neglén P. Chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins. New England Journal of Medicine 2009;360(22):2319‐27.

Rudofsky 1989

Rudofsky G. Intravenous prostaglandin E1 in the treatment of venous ulcers ‐ a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. VASA. Supplementum 1989;28:39‐43.

Salzman 1971

Salzman EW, Harris WH, DeSanctis RW. Reduction in venous thromboembolism by agents affecting platelet function. New England Journal of Medicine 1971;284(23):1287‐92.

Schunemann 2011a

Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Vist GE, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. Chapter 11: Presenting results, 'Summary of findings' tables. In: Higgins JPT. Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Schunemann 2011b

Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, Guyatt GH. Chapter 12: Interpreting results, drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT. Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Sibbald 1998

Sibbald RG. An approach to leg and foot ulcers: a brief overview. Ostomy Wound Management 1998;44:28‐32,34‐5.

SIGN 2011

Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Search filters. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/filters.html#random (accessed 5 May 2011).

Thomas 1988

Thomas PR, Nash GB, Dormandy JA. White cells accumulation in dependent legs of patients with venous hypertension: a possible mechanism for trophic changes in the skin. BMJ (Clinical Research Edition) 1988;296(6638):1693‐5.

Valencia 2001

Valencia IC, Falabella A, Kirsner RS, Eaglstein WH. Chronic venous insufficiency and venous leg ulceration. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2001;44:401‐21.

Vane 1971

Vane JR. Inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis as a mechanism of action of aspirin‐like drugs. Nature: New Biology 1971;231(25):232‐5.

Weller 2012

Weller C, Ademi Z, Makarounas‐Kirchmann K, Stoelwinder J. Economic evaluation of compression therapy in venous leg ulcer randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. Wound Practice & Research: Journal of the Australian Wound Management Association 2012;20(1):21‐6.

Werner‐Schlenzka 1994

Werner‐Schlenzka H, Lehnert W. Topical treatment of venous leg ulcers with a prostacyclin hydrogel: a double blind trial. Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes, and Essential Fatty Acids 1994;51:203‐6.

Winter 1966

Winter CA. Nonsteroid anti‐inflammatory agents. Annual Review of Pharmacology 1966;6:157‐74.

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

del Río Solá 2012

Methods

Prospective RCT

Participants

51 people with venous leg ulcers (29 women and 22 men); mean age of 60 years (range from 36‐86)

Interventions

Intervention Group (n = 23): aspirin 300 mg/day

Control Group (n = 28): no placebo treatment

Compression therapy was used for both groups

Outcomes

  • Number of people with ulcers completely healed

  • Time for complete ulcer healing

  • Number of ulcer recurrences

  • Time until ulcer recurrence

Notes

Excluded patients with diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral arterial disease, neurologic disease, previous or concomitant therapy with aspirin, and ulcers ≤ 2 cm

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

Performed by an independent researcher using a computer program

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

High risk

The comparison was conducted between intervention and non‐intervention, blinding of participants and personnel was not possible in this case

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

The participants were evaluated weekly using a specific form, but no information was provided about blinding of the personnel who did this work

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

High risk

There were 4 withdrawals; 2 people were hospitalised and 2 people opted for treatment in another service. The authors did not describe the cause of the hospitalisations or group assignment of the withdrawn participants

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

The only primary prespecified outcome reported was the influence of aspirin on the rate of ulcer healing

Other bias

High risk

The individual data for each participant were not presented

There were some inconsistencies and mistakes in the reported results (the same outcome measures were presented with different values in the text and in the tables)

Layton 1994

Methods

Prospective double‐blind and placebo‐controlled RCT

Participants

20 people with chronic venous leg ulcers

Interventions

Intervention Group (n = 10): aspirin 300 mg/day

Control Group (n = 10): placebo

Outcomes

  • Reduction of ulcer surface area in the second and fourth months.

  • Percentage of ulcers healed completely in trial period

Notes

People with ulcers ≤ 2 cm and previous or concomitant therapy with aspirin were excluded

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Not described

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Study was described as double‐blinded but the strategy for blinding the patients and personnel was not described

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

The assessment of ulcer area was conducted using planimetry of photographs of ulcers

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

High risk

The individual data from each participant were not presented

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

High risk

Both the primary prespecified outcomes were reported (the influence of aspirin on the reduction of ulcer surface area and percentage of ulcers healed completely in trial period)

Other bias

High risk

The prevalence of co morbidities (diabetes, arterial hypertension) that could influence the ulcer healing was not reported

Abbreviation

RCT: randomized controlled trial

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Ibbotson 1995

This trial used the same participants and data as the Layton 1994 trial to evaluate some haemostatic parameters in people with venous leg ulcers taking oral aspirin. This group of people with leg ulcers was compared with a control group of healthy people

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

ACTRN12614000293662

Trial name or title

Clinical effectiveness of aspirin as an adjunct to compression therapy in healing chronic venous leg ulcers: a randomised double‐blinded placebo‐controlled trial [the ASPiVLU study]

Methods

Prospective, randomised, double blinded, 2 groups in parallel

Participants

268 male or female

Inclusion:

  • Age 18 years and older

  • Have one or more leg ulcers in the presence of venous insufficiency confirmed by clinical assessment and/or duplex ultrasound

  • The target ulcer (largest ulcer) must be separated from other ulcers by at least 1 cm.

  • The target ulcer must have been present for at least six weeks or has prior history of venous ulceration

  • The target ulcer has an area ≥1 cm2 to ≤ 20 cm2 as measured by digital planimetry techniques

  • An Ankle Brachial Pressure Index [ABPI] measure of ≥ 0.7 mmHg or systolic toe pressure ≥ 50 mmHg to exclude significant arterial insufficiency.

  • Participant is able to give informed consent

Exclusion criteria:

  • Unable to attend scheduled treatment visits and comply with follow‐up contact with study staff

  • Aspirin intolerance contraindication to aspirin (according to medical practitioner’s clinical judgement)

  • Current, regular aspirin use

  • Concurrent use of any other antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy

  • Any existing condition or treatment that is a contraindication to use of aspirin or to participate in the trial (decision made according to medical practitioner’s clinical judgement)

  • Pregnancy or breastfeeding

Interventions

Aspirin Arm: will receive oral dose 300 mg enteric coated aspirin daily for 24 weeks

Placebo Arm: will receive oral dose of placebo tablet daily for 24 weeks

All participants will be treated with compression

Outcomes

Primary measures:

  • Time to healing

  • Proof of healing (100% epithelialisation with no scab and no exudate)

Secondary measures:

  • Proportion of participants with healed venous leg ulcers

  • Recurrence of target ulcer: After healing, participants will be followed up to assess target ulcer recurrence

  • Wound pain score

  • Health‐related quality of life and wellbeing index

  • Adverse Events

  • Adherence to compression treatment or secondary prevention compression hosiery once healed

  • Adherence to medication

  • Serum samples

  • Hospitalisation

Starting date

March 2015

Contact information

[email protected]

[email protected]

Notes

Financial support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (APP1069329).

ASPiVLU is registered with Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Registration number: ACTRN12614000293662
Bayer Schering Pharm manufactured the aspirin and matching placebo.

NCT02158806

Trial name or title

Low dose aspirin for venous leg ulcers (Aspirin4VLU)

Methods

Prospective, randomised, double blinded, 2 groups in parallel

Participants

Estimated enrolment: 354 patients; 18 years or older; both genders

Inclusion criteria:

  • Diagnosed with venous leg ulcers (clinical indications of venous ulceration, ankle brachial Index ≥ 0.8, and other causative aetiologies ruled out)

  • Able to tolerate compression therapy

  • Able to provide written informed consent

  • Confirmation with participant's general practitioner that the participant can take low dose aspirin or placebo

Exclusion criteria:

  • Pregnant or breast‐feeding women

  • History of myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, angina or significant peripheral arterial disease

  • History of adverse effects related to aspirin use

  • Currently using aspirin, or other anti‐platelet or anticoagulant therapy

  • Opinion of screening medical practitioner at National Institute of Health Innovation that participant has an existing condition or treatment that is a contraindication to use of aspirin or to participation in the trial

Interventions

Experimental: aspirin 150 mg capsule once daily for up to 24 weeks

Placebo comparator: inert capsule matching aspirin capsule once daily for up to 24 weeks

Outcomes

Primary outcome measures

  • Time to complete healing of reference ulcer (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: no)

  • Time to event (complete healing defined as intact skin with absence of scab)

Secondary outcome measures

  • Proportion of participants with healed venous leg ulcers (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: no)

  • Proportion of participants in each arm with completely healed reference ulcers at 24 weeks

  • Change in health‐related quality of life (generic) (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: no)

  • Change in generic health‐related quality of life (measured by Short Form 36) from baseline to 24 weeks

  • Adverse events (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: yes)

  • Incidence rate ratio of adverse events and serious adverse events at 24 weeks

  • Adherence to treatment (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: no)

  • Adherence to study medication as measured by pill counts at 24 weeks

  • Change in health‐related quality of life (disease‐specific) (time frame: 24 weeks; designated as safety issue: no)

  • Change in disease‐specific health‐related quality of life (measured by Charing Cross Venous Ulcer Questionnaire) from baseline to 24 weeks

Starting date

January 2015

Contact information

Andrew Jull [email protected];

Chris Bullen [email protected]

Notes

NCT02333123

Trial name or title

Aspirin for Venous Ulcers: Randomised Trial (AVURT)

Methods

Phase II randomised, double blind, parallel group, placebo‐controlled efficacy trial

Participants

Estimated enrolment: 100 patients; >18 years

Inclusion criteria:

  • patients with at least one chronic venous leg ulcer

  • ulcer area >1cm2

  • ABPI 0.8 or greater

  • informed consent

Exclusion criteria:

  • unable to consent

  • unwilling to consent

  • foot ulcer

  • leg ulcer of non‐venous aetiology

  • ABPI <0.8

  • regular concomitant aspirin

  • previous intolerance or contraindication to aspirin

  • prohibited mediation: probenecid, anticoagulants

  • known lactose intolerance

  • pregnant or lactating women

  • already in another study investigating leg ulcer therapy

  • previously recruited to trial

Interventions

Experimental: aspirin 300 mg once daily for up to 27 weeks

Placebo comparator: placebo once daily for up to 27 weeks

Outcomes

Primary outcome measures

  • Time to complete healing of reference ulcer

Secondary outcome measures

  • Ulcer size

  • recurrence of reference ulcer

  • adverse events

  • ulcer related pain

  • treatment compliance (compression and medication)

  • resource use (dressings and consultations)

Starting date

2015

Contact information

not available

Notes

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Oral aspirin versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of people with healed ulcer Show forest plot

1

51

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.71, 1.36]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 1 Number of people with healed ulcer.

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 1 Number of people with healed ulcer.

2 Time to recurrence (days) Show forest plot

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

22.67 [18.96, 26.38]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 2 Time to recurrence (days).

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 2 Time to recurrence (days).

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Flow diagram of included and excluded studies
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Flow diagram of included and excluded studies

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 1 Number of people with healed ulcer.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 1 Number of people with healed ulcer.

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 2 Time to recurrence (days).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Oral aspirin versus control, Outcome 2 Time to recurrence (days).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Oral aspirin for venous leg ulcers

Oral aspirin for venous leg ulcers

Patient or population: patients with venous leg ulcers
Settings: hospital outpatients in UK and Spain
Intervention: oral aspirin

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Control

Oral aspirin

Average time for ulcer healing

22 weeks

12 weeks

Not estimable

51 (1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

P values and confidence intervals were not reported

Reduction of ulcer area (median)

0 cm²

6.5cm²

Not estimable

20
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2,3

P value < 0.002

Follow‐up: 4 months

Proportion of healed ulcers in the trial period

No healed ulcers

38% of healed ulcers

Not estimable

20
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2,3

P value < 0.007

Follow‐up: 4 months

Major bleeding

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

20
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2,3

No events were observed in either group, follow‐up: 4 months

Another study reported 2 hospitalisations for unknown reasons, intervention group not specified

Average time of ulcer recurrence

16.33 days

SD: 7.5

39 days

SD: 6.0

Not estimable

51
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low1,2

P value = 0.007

Post hoc assessment not pre‐specified in protocol

Mortality

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

See comment

See comment

Mortality not reported

Other adverse events

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

71
(2 study)

See comment

No events were observed in either group. del Río Solá reported 2 hospitalisations for unknown reasons, the group of these patients were not specified and they were removed from the study

*The basis for the assumed risk (for example, the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio; SD: standard deviation

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate

1 Allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessment were not described. Participants and personnel were not blinded. There was a high risk of bias from incomplete outcome data.There were some inconsistencies in the reporting of the data
2 The study results are based on one small study with insufficient data to estimate the effect precisely
3 Selection, performance and reporting biases were unclear

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Oral aspirin for venous leg ulcers
Table 1. Data extracted from included studies

Study identification

 Layton

 del Río Solá

Country        

United Kingdom

Spain

Period

Not reported

2001 to 2005

Centres

Academic Unit of Dermatology, General Infirmary at Leeds, West Yorkshire

University Hospital of Valladolid

Source of funding

 Not specified

 Not specified

Method

Study design

Prospective randomized, double‐blind

Prospective randomized trial

Power calculation

Not described

Yes

Method of randomisation

Not described

Generated by computer program

Concealment of allocation

Not described

Not described

Number of participants randomized

20

51

Number of participants analyzed

20

47

Number of participants excluded after randomizations

0

0

Number of participant withdrawals and reasons

0

4 people; 2 people needed hospitalisation and left the study and 2 people opted for treatment in another service

Intention‐to‐treat analysis

Yes

Yes

Participants

Inclusion criteria

People with chronic venous leg ulcer

Venous leg ulcer ≥ 2 cm

Ankle‐brachial rate < 0.9

No contraindication to taking aspirin

Exclusion criteria

Ulcer diameter < 2 cm

Already taking aspirin, anticoagulants or non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory

Doppler flowmetry ankle‐brachial rate < 0.9

People with diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral arterial disease and neurologic disease

Previous or concomitant therapy with aspirin

Aspirin

Control

P value

Aspirin

Control

P value

Number of participants

10

10

 

23

 28

 

Age (years)

62.2 years (mean)

(48‐81)

66 years (mean)

(46 ‐ 85)

 

60.50 years (SD:12.07)

58.59 years (SD:16.55)

reported as non significant

Sex

3 female, 7 male

5 female, 5 male

 

10 female, 13 male

19 female, 9 male

reported as non significant

Ulcer duration before the study

11.4 years (mean)

(1‐24)

10.5 years (mean)

(2‐22)

 

6‐12 months

> 12 months

 

1 Number of ulcers

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

reported as non significant

Initial ulcer surface area (cm²)

16.5 cm² (mean)

(2.5‐39.5)

14.25 cm² (mean)

(1.5‐48.5)

25.15 cm²

24.87 cm²

P=0.944

Signs of ulcer infection

Not reported

Not reported

Yes, 20 patients

Yes, 22 patients

P=0.094

Any comorbidity

Not reported

Not reported

9 patients

10 patients

Previously treated

\not reported

Not reported

10 patients

20 patients

Interventions

Aspirin 300 mg/day

Placebo

Aspirin 300 mg/day

No drug treatment

Outcomes

Follow‐up (months)

4 months

4 months

42 months mean (24‐61)

42 months mean (24‐61)

2 Withdrawals

0

0

2 people

2 people

Duration of the study to complete ulcer healing

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

12.4 weeks

16.5 weeks

P=0.07 Mann‐Whitney

Healing period

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Reported as short in the aspirin group

Reported as short in the aspirin group

P=0.04

log‐rank test = 3.90

OR = 0.93 95% CI 0.25‐3.5

Average time to complete ulcer healing (weeks)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

12

22

Not reported

Number of participants with complete ulcer healing in the trial period

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

17 (74%)

21 (75%)

reported as non significant

Proportion of ulcers healed in the trial period

38% of the ulcers

0% of the ulcers

< 0.007

(x² test)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Change in ulcer areas in the trial period (second month; ulcer area cm²)

15.5 cm² (median)

1 cm² of reduction

(6.07% of reduction)

No reduction

< 0.01 (x² test)

 Not reported

 Not reported

Not reported

Reduction in ulcer size in the trial period (fourth month; ulcer area cm²)

10.0 cm² (median)

6.5 cm² of reduction (39.4% of reduction)

No reduction

< 0.002 (x² test)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Improvement assessed by reduction in ulcer size

52% of the ulcers

26% of the ulcers

< 0.007

(x² test)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Increase in ulcer size in the trial period

10% of the ulcers

26% of the ulcers

< 0.004

(x² test)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Ulcers size unchanged in the trial period

0% of the ulcers

48% of the ulcers

< 0.001

(x2 test)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

Proportion of participants with ulcers healed in the trial period

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

17 (74%)

21 (75%)

reported as non significant

Proportion of participants with ulcer recurrence

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

25%

33.33%

0.74

Average time for ulcer recurrence (days)

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

39 (SD 6)

16.33 (SD 7.5)

P=0.007 Kaplan‐Meier

adverse effects

0

0

0

0

Not reported

  1. Layton reported 12 people (60%) and del Rio 28 people (54%) with multiples ulcers but they did not specified the number in each group

  2. del Rio Solá reported that two people were hospitalised and were withdrawn from the study, but did not specify the cause of hospitalisation or their trial group

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Data extracted from included studies
Comparison 1. Oral aspirin versus control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of people with healed ulcer Show forest plot

1

51

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.71, 1.36]

2 Time to recurrence (days) Show forest plot

1

51

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

22.67 [18.96, 26.38]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Oral aspirin versus control