8 research outputs found

    Clinical outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with de novo three vessel disease: 1-year results of the SYNTAX II study

    Get PDF
    Aims: To investigate if recent technical and procedural developments in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly influence outcomes in appropriately selected patients with three-vessel (3VD) coronary artery disease. Methods and results: The SYNTAX II study is a multicenter, all-comers, open-label, single arm study that investigated the impact of a contemporary PCI strategy on clinical outcomes in patients with 3VD in 22 centres from four European countries. The SYNTAX-II strategy includes: heart team decision-making utilizing the SYNTAX Score II (a clinical tool combining anatomical and clinical factors), coronary physiology guided revascularisation, implantation of thin strut bio-resorbable-polymer drug-eluting stents, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation, contemporary chronic total occlusion revascularisation techniques and guideline-directed medical therapy. The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE [composite of all-cause death, cerebrovascular event, any myocardial infarction and any revascularisation]) at one year was compared to a predefined PCI cohort from the original SYNTAX-I trial selected on the basis of equipoise 4-year mortality between CABG and PCI. As an exploratory endpoint, comparisons were made with the historical CABG cohort of the original SYNTAX-I trial. Overall 708 patients were screened and discussed within the heart team; 454 patients were deemed appropriate to undergo PCI. At one year, the SYNTAX-II strategy was superior to the equipoise-derived SYNTAX-I PCI cohort (MACCE SYNTAX-II 10.6% vs. SYNTAX-I 17.4%; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.85, P= 0.006). This difference was driven by a significant reduction in the incidence of MI (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.70, P= 0.007) and revascularisation (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.9, P = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27-1.73, P = 0.43) and stroke (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.10-4.89, P = 0.71) were similar. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower in SYNTAX-II (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.97, P = 0.045). Conclusion: At one year, clinical outcomes with the SYNTAX-II strategy were associated with improved clinical results compared to the PCI performed in comparable patients from the original SYNTAX-I trial. Longer term follow-up is awaited and a randomized clinical trial with contemporary CABG is warranted

    Assessment of structural knowledge for training evaluation in process control environments

    Full text link
    Objective: The objective of the present studies was to apply a novel method for structural knowledge assessment to process control to assess the potential of its measures as a training outcome. Background: Traditionally, knowledge is assessed by verbal achievement tests on the subject matter. However, traditional methods are regarded as limited in their ability to assess higher-order learning or understanding. Method: Two experiments (Experiment 1, N = 41; Experiment 2, N = 50) were conducted in which participants were given a 4-hr training session on a simulated process control task. At a later testing session, participants worked on the task for 70 min and completed knowledge tests on declarative, procedural, and structural knowledge. Structural knowledge was measured with the computer-based Association Structure Test (AST), which combines an association task and Pathfinder network on the basis of relatedness ratings. Results: In both studies, structural knowledge was significantly related to diagnostic performance, and evidence was found for internal consistency as well as convergent and predictive validity. Conclusion: Findings indicate that structural assessment with the AST shows promise as a training outcome in process control. Application: Potential applications of this research include the improvement of training design, delivery, and evaluation

    International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre�COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re�myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre�COVID-19 databases (MINAP Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project 2019 and BCIS British Cardiovascular Intervention Society 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non�ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19�positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre�COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients. © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundatio

    International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients

    International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

    No full text
    Background: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts. Methods: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). Results: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients. © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundatio

    Cell Survival Programs and Ischemia/Reperfusion: Hormesis, Preconditioning, and Cardioprotection

    No full text
    corecore