cardiology careers collections past issues search home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2006; 48:1918, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2006.09.015 (Published online 16 October 2006).
© 2006 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
j.jacc.2006.09.015v1
j.jacc.2006.09.015v2
48/9/1918    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Gum PA, Kottke-Marchant K, Welsh PA, White J, Topol EJ. A prospective, blinded determination of the natural history of aspirin resistance among stable patients with cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:961–965.

In this article, the maximum platelet aggregation values (second replicate values) rather than the mean of the duplicate values were reported for both adenosine diphosphate and arachidonic acid. The data, as published, are correct for calculations of aspirin resistance and clinical events when the maximum platelet aggregation data are used. When the mean values are used, the original aspirin resistance prevalence of 5.5% becomes 2.8%, because 8 borderline aspirin resistance patients no longer meet the strict criteria for aspirin resistance. The percentage of patients with death/myocardial infarction/cerebrovascular accident in the 2 groups remains virtually the same as published, with a higher frequency of aspirin resistance patients (2 of 8; 25%) with adverse outcome versus non-aspirin resistance patients (36 of 307; 11.7%). However, due to the lower number of aspirin resistance patients, the difference is no longer statistically significant (p = 0.25). The revised multivariate analysis using mean aggregation values still shows aspirin resistance to be an independent predictor of long-term adverse events (hazard ratio 5.07, 95% confidence interval 1.16 to 22.22, p = 0.03).

These changes do not affect the Discussion or Conclusions of this article. The authors regret the error.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
j.jacc.2006.09.015v1
j.jacc.2006.09.015v2
48/9/1918    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

 
  cardiology careers collections past issues search home