Incidence and follow-up of Braunwald subgroups in unstable angina pectoris

Objectives. This study was performed to establish the prognosis of patients with unstable angina within the subgroups of the Braunwald classification. Background. Among many classifications of unstable angina, the Braunwald classification is frequently used. However, the incidence and risk for each subgroup in clinical practice have not been established. Methods. Prospective data for 417 consecutive patients admitted for suspected unstable angina were analyzed. Patients were classified according to Braunwald criteria and followed up for 6 months. Survival, infarct-free survival and infarct-free survival without intervention are reported for each class. Results. After in-hospital observation the final diagnosis was acute myocardial infarction in 26 patients (6%), noncoronary chest pain in 109 (26%) and definite unstable angina in 282 (68%). Recurrence of chest pain was significantly different for the different severity classes (28%, 45% and 64% for classes I [accelerated angina], II [subacute angina at rest] and III [acute angina at rest], respectively) but not for clinical circumstances (49% and 53% for classes B [primary unstable angina]and C [postinfarction unstable angina], respectively). Six-month and infarct-free survival (96% and 88%, respectively) were not significantly different between severity classes but were significantly different (p = 0.01) between classes B (97% and 89%) and C (89% and 80%). Infarct-free survival without intervention was best for class II (72%), intermediate for class I (53%) and worst for class III (35%). In multivariate analysis, elderly age, male gender, hypertension, class C and maximal (intravenous) therapy were independent predictors for death; elderly age and class C for infarct-free survival; and male gender, class III, class C, electrocardiographic changes and maximal therapy were associated with infarct-free survival without intervention. Conclusions. Braunwald classification is an appropriate instrument to predict outcome. Risk stratification by these criteria provides a tool for patient selection in clinical trials and for evaluation of treatment strategies

Observation Versus Embolization in Patients with Blunt Splenic Injury after Trauma: A Propensity Score Analysis

Background: Non-operative management (NOM) is the standard of care in hemodynamically stable patients with blunt splenic injury after trauma. Splenic artery embolization (SAE) is reported to increase observation success rate. Studies demonstrating improved splenic salvage rates with SAE primarily compared SAE with historical controls. The aim of this study was to investigate whether SAE improves success rate compared to observation alone in contemporaneous patients with blunt splenic injury. Methods: We included adult patients with blunt splenic injury admitted to five Level 1 Trauma Centers between January 2009 and December 2012 and selected for NOM. Successful treatment was defined as splenic salvage and no splenic re-intervention. We calculated propensity scores, expressing the probability of undergoing SAE, using multivariable logistic regression and created five strata based on the quintiles of the propensity score distribution. A weighted relative risk (RR) was calculated across strata to express the chances of success with SAE. Results: Two hundred and six patients were included in the study. Treatment was successful in 180 patients: 134/146 (92 %) patients treated with observation and 48/57 (84 %) patients treated with SAE. The weighted RR for success with SAE was 1.17 (0.94-1.45); for complications, the weighted RR was 0.71 (0.41-1.22). The mean number of transfused blood products was 4.4 (SD 9.9) in the observation group versus 9.1 (SD 17.2) in the SAE group. Conclusions: After correction for confounders with propensity score stratification technique, there was no significant difference between embolization and observation alone with regard to successful treatment in patients with blunt splenic injury after trauma

Face-to-face vs telephone pre-colonoscopy consultation in colorectal cancer screening; A randomised trial

Background: A pre-colonoscopy consultation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is necessary to assess a screenees general health status and to explain benefits and risks of screening. The first option allows for personal attention, whereas a telephone consultation does not require travelling. We hypothesised that a telephone consultation would lead to higher response and participation in CRC screening compared with a face-to-face consultation. Methods:A total of 6600 persons (50-75 years) were 1: 1 randomised for primary colonoscopy screening with a pre-colonoscopy consultation either face-to-face or by telephone. In both arms, we counted the number of invitees who attended a pre-colonoscopy consultation (response) and the number of those who subsequently attended colonoscopy (participation), relative to the number invited for screening. A questionnaire regarding satisfaction with the consultation and expected burden of the colonoscopy (scored on five-point rating scales) was sent to invitees. Besides, a questionnaire to assess the perceived burden of colonoscopy was sent to participants, 14 days after the procedure.Results:In all, 3302 invitees were allocated to the telephone group and 3298 to the face-to-face group, of which 794 (24%) attended a telephone consultation and 822 (25%) a face-to-face consultation (P=0.41). Subsequently, 674 (20%) participants in the telephone group and 752 (23%) in the face-to-face group attended colonoscopy (P=0.018). Invitees and responders in the telephone group expected the bowel preparation to be more painful than those in the face-to-face group while perceived burden scores for the full screening procedure were comparable. More subjects in the face-to-face group than in the telephone group were satisfied by the consultation in general: (99.8% vs 98.5%, P=0.014).Conclusion:Using a telephone rather than a face-to-face consultation in a population-based CRC colonoscopy screening progr

Optimizing the use of expert panel reference diagnoses in diagnostic studies of multidimensional syndromes

__Abstract__ Background: In the absence of a gold standard, a panel of experts can be invited to assign a reference diagnosis for use in research. Available literature offers limited guidance on assembling and working with an expert panel for this purpose. We aimed to develop a protocol for an expert panel consensus diagnosis and evaluated its applicability in a pilot project. Methods: An adjusted Delphi method was used, which started with the assessment of clinical vignettes by 3 experts individually, followed by a consensus discussion meeting to solve diagnostic discrepancies. A panel facilitator ensured that all experts were able to express their views, and encouraged the use of argumentation to arrive at a specific diagnosis, until consensus was reached by all experts. Eleven vignettes of patients suspected of having a primary neurodegenerative disease were presented to the experts. Clinical information was provided stepwise and included medical history, neurological, physical and cognitive function, brain MRI scan, and follow-up assessments over 2 years. After the consensus discussion meeting, the procedure was evaluated by the experts. Results: The average degree of consensus for the reference diagnosis increased from 52% after individual assessment of the vignettes to 94% after the consensus discussion meeting. Average confidence in the diagnosis after individual assessment was 85%. This did not increase after the consensus discussion meeting. The process evaluation led to several recommendations for improvement of the protocol. Conclusion: A protocol for attaining a reference diagnosis based on expert panel consensus was shown feasible in research practice

Does ovarian hyperstimulation in intrauterine insemination for cervical factor subfertility improve pregnancy rates?

Background: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) can be performed with or without controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). Studies in which the additional benefit of COH on IUI for cervical factor subfertility is assessed are lacking. We assessed whether COH in IUI improved pregnancy rates in cervical factor subfertility. Methods: We performed a historical cohort study among couples with cervical factor subfertility, treated with IUI. A cervical factor was diagnosed by a well-timed, non-progressive post-coital test with normal semen parameters. We compared ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle in groups treated with IUI with or without COH. We tabulated ongoing pregnancy rates per cycle number and compared the effectiveness of COH by stratified univariable analysis. Results: We included 181 couples who underwent 330 cycles without COH and 417 cycles with COH. Ongoing pregnancy rates in IUI cycles without and with COH were 9.7% and 12.7%, respectively (odds ratio 1.4; 95% confidence interval 0.85-2.2). The pregnancy rates in IUI without COH in cycles 1, 2, 3 and 4 were 14%, 11%, 6% and 15%, respectively. For IUI with COH, these rates were 17%, 15%, 14% and 16%, respectively. Conclusions: Although our data indicate that COH improves the pregnancy rate over IUI without COH, IUI without COH generates acceptable pregnancy rates in couples with cervical factor subfertility. Since IUI without COH bears no increased risk for multiple pregnancy, this treatment should be seriously considered in couples with cervical factor subfertility

Study protocol: Population screening for colorectal cancer by colonoscopy or CT colonography: A randomized controlled trial

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most prevalent type of cancer in Europe. Early detection and removal of CRC or its precursor lesions by population screening can reduce mortality. Colonoscopy and computed tomography colonography (CT colonography) are highly accurate exams and screening options that examine the entire colon. The success of screening depends on the participation rate. We designed a randomized trial to compare the uptake, yield and costs of direct colonoscopy population screening, using either a telephone consultation or a consultation at the outpatient clinic, versus CT colonography first, with colonoscopy in CT colonography positives.Methods and design: 7,500 persons between 50 and 75 years will be randomly selected from the electronic database of the municipal administration registration and will receive an invitation to participate in either CT colonography (2,500 persons) or colonoscopy (5,000 persons) screening. Those invited for colonoscopy screening will be randomized to a prior consultation either by telephone or a visit at the outpatient clinic. All CT colonography invitees will have a prior consultation by telephone. Invitees are instructed to consult their general practitioner and not to participate in screening if they have symptoms suggestive for CRC. After provid

Angiographic risk factors of luminal narrowing after coronary balloon angioplasty using balloon measurements to reflect stretch and elastic recoil at the dilation site. The CARPORT Study Group

Because many ongoing clinical restenosis prevention trials are using quantitative angiography to assess whether a drug is capable of reducing the amount of intimal hyperplasia, quantitative angiographic risk factors for angiographic luminal narrowing after balloon angioplasty were determined, including stretch and elastic recoil at the dilatation site. Quantitative analysis was performed on 666 lesions in 575 patients during angioplasty and at 6-month follow-up. Stretch was defined as balloon diameter minus minimal luminal diameter (MLD) before angioplasty/reference diameter, and recoil as balloon diameter minus MLD after angioplasty/reference diameter. Multivariate analysis was used to yield independent risk factors for luminal narrowing at follow-up. Predictors of absolute change in MLD were (1) relative gain at angioplasty (gain in millimeters normalized for reference diameter) and (2) lesion length. To allow risk stratification, logistic regression analysis was applied using the decrease in MLD as a binary outcome variable. A decrease in MLD at follow-up of greater than or equal to 0.72 mm was considered significant. Variables retained in the model were: relative gain greater than 0.3 mm (rate ratio 2.9), relative gain 0.2 to 0.3 (rate ratio 2.1), stenosis length greater than or equal to 6.8 (rate ratio 1.7), and thrombus after angioplasty (rate ratio 2.6). Although stretch was significantly related to luminal narrowing at univariate analysis, it was not retained in the multivariate models. A large gain in lumen diameter at angioplasty, dilation of long lesions, and angiographically determined thrombus after angioplasty were found to be accompanied by more severe luminal narrowing at follow-up

Variation in the use of coronary angiography in patients with unstable angina is related to differences in patient population and availability of angiography facilities, without affecting prognosis

OBJECTIVES: Examination of the difference in management strategies with respect to coronary angiography in patients with unstable angina pectoris, and the consequences of this difference on prognosis. DESIGN: Prospective registration of consecutive patients admitted to two different hospitals. SETTING: University and a large community hospital in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Patients under 80 years, without recent (< 4 weeks) infarction or recent (< 6 months) coronary revascularization procedure, admitted for chest pain suspected to indicate unstable angina pectoris. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Decision to initiate coronary angiography or to continue on medical treatment. At 6 months the occurrence of death and myocardial infarction was measured. RESULTS: Clinical variables associated with the decision to initiate angiography were young age, male gender, progression of angina, multiple pain episodes and use of beta-blocker or calcium antagonists before admission, abnormal ST-T segment on baseline ECG, recurrent pain in hospital, and ECG changes during pain. These associations did not differ between hospitals. Nevertheless, angiography was performed more often in the presence of angiography facilities (university hospital), independent of the variable case-mix. Survival and infarct-free survival were similar in both hospitals, 96% and 90% respectively. CONCLUSION: The difference in angiography rate for unstable angina can be explained in part by differences in patient population and hospital facilities, but no difference was observed in physicians' assessment of patient characteristics. The observed practice variation did not affect prognosis

Comparing the diagnostic yields of technologists and radiologists in an invitational colorectal cancer screening program performed with CT colonography

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic yields of a radiologist and trained technologists in the detection of advanced neoplasia within a population-based computed tomographic (CT) colonography screening program. Materials and Methods: Ethical approval was obtained from the Dutch Health Council, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Nine hundred eighty-two participants (507 men, 475 women) underwent low-dose CT colonography after noncathartic bowel preparation (iodine tagging) between July 13, 2009, and January 21, 2011. Each scan was evaluated by one of three experienced radiologists (≥800 examinations) by using primary two-dimensional (2D) reading followed by secondary computer-aided detection (CAD) and by two of four trained technologists (≥200 examinations, with colonoscopic verification) by using primary 2D reading followed by three-dimensional analysis and CAD. Immediate colonoscopy was recommended for participants with lesions measuring at least 10 mm, and surveillance was recommended for participants with lesions measuring 6-9 mm. Consensus between technologists was achieved in case of discordant recommendations. Detection of advanced neoplasia (classified by a pathologist) was defined as a true-positive (TP) finding. Relative TP and false-positive (FP) fractions were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Overall, 96 of the 982 participants were referred for colonoscopy and 104 were scheduled for surveillance. Sixty of 84 participants (71%) referred for colonoscopy by the radiologist had advanced neoplasia, compared with 55 of 64 participants (86%) referred by two technologists. Both the radiologist and technologists detected all colorectal cancers (n = 5). The relative TP fraction (for technologists vs radiologist) for advanced neoplasia was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.78, 1.07), and the relative FP fraction was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.67). Conclusion: Two technologists serving as a primary reader of CT colonographic images can achieve a comparable sensitivity to that of a radiologist for the detection of advanced neoplasia, with far fewer FP referrals for colonoscopy