Sex-Specific Epidemiology of Heart Failure Risk and Mortality in Europe Results From the BiomarCaRE Consortium

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates differences between women and men in heart failure (HF) risk and mortality.BACKGROUND: Sex differences in HF epidemiology are insufficiently understood.METHODS: In 78,657 individuals (median 49.5 years of age; age range 24.1 to 98.7 years; 51.7% women) from community-based European studies (FINRISK, DanMONICA, Moli-sani, Northern Sweden) of the BiomarCaRE (Biomarker for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe) consortium, the association between incident HF and mortality, the relationship of cardiovascular risk factors, prevalent cardiovascular diseases, biomarkers (C-reactive protein [CRP]; N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP]) with incident HF, and their attributable risks were tested in women vs. men.RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 12.7 years, fewer HF cases were observed in women (n = 2,399 [5.9%]) than in men (n = 2,771 [7.3%]). HF incidence increased markedly after 60 years of age, initially with a more rapid increase in men, whereas incidence in women exceeded that of men after 85 years of age. HF onset substantially increased mortality risk in both sexes. Multivariable-adjusted Cox models showed the following sex differences for the association with incident HF: systolic blood pressure hazard ratio (HR) according to SD in women of 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 1.14) versus HR of 1.19 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.24) in men; heart rate HR of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.93 to 1.03) in women versus HR of 1.09 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.13) in men; CRP HR of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.00 to 1.20) in women versus HR of 1.32 (95% CI: 1.24 to 1.41) in men; and NT-proBNP HR of 1.54 (95% CI: 1.37 to 1.74) in women versus HR of 1.89 (95% CI: 1.75 to 2.05) in men. Population-attributable risk of all risk factors combined was 59.0% in women and 62.9% in men.CONCLUSIONS: Women had a lower risk for HF than men. Sex differences were seen for systolic blood pressure, heart rate, CRP, and NT-proBNP, with a lower HF risk in women. (C) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.</div

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Oxford House Residents’ Attitudes Toward Medication Assisted Treatment Use in Fellow Residents

Methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone are medication assisted treatment (MAT) options for treating opioid use disorder, yet attitudes regarding their use within abstinence-based recovery homes have not been assessed. The present investigation examined attitudes regarding MAT utilization among residents living in Oxford Houses. This cross-sectional investigation compared residents (n = 87) receiving MAT whose recent drug use involved opioids, and two groups not receiving MATs; those who had used opioids and those who had used substances other than opioids. The vast majority of residents were not receiving MAT, yet 32% reported MAT histories. Negative attitudes regarding MAT were observed among residents who were not receiving MAT. Those presently receiving MAT reported mixed attitudes regarding the use of methadone and buprenorphine/naloxone, and two of these residents reported they had never been prescribed MAT. Findings suggest that abstinence-based recovery homes such as Oxford Houses may not be optimal resources for persons receiving MATs. © 2018 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Natur

Correction To: Oxford House Residents’ Attitudes Toward Medication Assisted Treatment Use in Fellow Residents

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in the author group, where co-authors Isabel Dovale, Noah Gelfman and Sarah Callahan were missed to include and Brandon Isler should be removed from the author group. © 2018 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Natur

Increased High-Density Lipoprotein Levels Associated with Age-Related Macular Degeneration Evidence from the EYE-RISK and European Eye Epidemiology Consortia

Ophthalmic researc

Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)