Chelation therapy to prevent diabetes-associated cardiovascular events

Purpose of review For over 60 years, chelation therapy with disodium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA, edetate) had been used for the treatment of cardiovascular disease (CVD) despite lack of scientific evidence for efficacy and safety. The Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) was developed and received funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to ascertain the safety and efficacy of chelation therapy in patients with CVD. Recent findings This pivotal trial demonstrated an improvement in outcomes in postmyocardial infarction (MI) patients. Interestingly, it also showed a particularly large reduction in CVD events and all-cause mortality in the prespecified subgroup of patients with diabetes. The TACT results may support the concept of metal chelation to reduce metal-catalyzed oxidation reactions that promote the formation of advanced glycation end products, a precursor of diabetic atherosclerosis. Summary In this review, we summarize the epidemiological and basic evidence linking toxic metal accumulation and diabetes-related CVD, supported by the salutary effects of chelation in TACT. If the ongoing NIH-funded TACT2, in diabetic post-MI patients, proves positive, this unique therapy will enter the armamentarium of endocrinologists and cardiologists seeking to reduce the atherosclerotic risk of their diabetic patients

Is a minimally invasive approach for re-operative aortic valve replacement superior to standard full resternotomy?

Abstract A best-evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'is a minimally invasive approach for re-operative aortic valve replacement (AVR) superior to standard full resternotomy?' A total of 193 papers were found using the reported search of which 13 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, country, journal and date of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that minimally invasive re-operative AVR can be performed with an operative morbidity and mortality at least similar to the standard full sternotomy approach. A shorter hospital length of stay and less blood product requirements are the main advantages of this technique. The incidence of prolonged ventilation, bleeding requiring re-operation, sternal wound infections and in-hospital mortality may be reduced with a minimally invasive approach. Prospective studies are required to confirm the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery and, up to date, conventional full re-sternotomy is still the standard approach for re-operative AVR

Incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing minimally invasive valve surgery

BackgroundWe hypothesize that minimally invasive valve surgery in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is superior to a conventional median sternotomy.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 1945 consecutive patients who underwent isolated valve surgery. Included were patients with CKD stages 2 to 5. In-hospital mortality, composite complication rates, and intensive care unit and total hospital lengths of stay of those who underwent a minimally invasive approach were compared with those who underwent a standard median sternotomy. Resource use was approximated based on intensive care unit and total hospital lengths of stay.ResultsThere were 688 patients identified; 510 (74%) underwent minimally invasive surgery, and 178 (26%) underwent a median sternotomy. There was no significant difference in mortality. Minimally invasive surgery was associated with fewer composite complications (33.1% vs 49.4%; odds ratio, 0.5; P ≤ .001), shorter intensive care unit (48 [interquartile range {IQR}, 33-74] hours vs 71 [IQR, 42-96] hours; P < .01), and hospital (8 [IQR, 6-9] days vs 10 [IQR, 8-15] days; P < .001) lengths of stay, and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury (8% vs 14.7%; odds ratio, 0.5; P = .01), compared with median sternotomy. In a multivariable analysis, minimally invasive surgery was associated with a 60% reduction in the risk of development of postoperative acute kidney injury.ConclusionsIn patients with CKD undergoing isolated valve surgery, minimally invasive valve surgery is associated with reduced postoperative complications and lower resource use

Quality of Life and Clinical Outcomes in Elderly Patients Treated with Ventricular Pacing as Compared with Dual-Chamber Pacing

ABSTRACT Background Standard clinical practice permits the use of either single-chamber ventricular pacemakers or dual-chamber pacemakers for most patients who require cardiac pacing. Ventricular pacemakers are less expensive, but dual-chamber pacemakers are believed to be more physiologic. However, it is not known whether either type of pacemaker results in superior clinical outcomes. Methods The Pacemaker Selection in the Elderly study was a 30-month, single-blind, randomized, controlled comparison of ventricular pacing and dualchamber pacing in 407 patients 65 years of age or older in 29 centers. Patients received a dual-chamber pacemaker that had been randomly programmed to either ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing. The primary end point was health-related quality of life as measured by the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey. Results The average age of the patients was 76 years (range, 65 to 96), and 60 percent were men. Quality of life improved significantly after pacemaker implantation (P0.001), but there were no differences between the two pacing modes in either the quality of life or prespecified clinical outcomes (including cardiovascular events or death). However, 53 patients assigned to ventricular pacing (26 percent) were crossed over to dual-chamber pacing because of symptoms related to the pacemaker syndrome. Patients with sinus-node dysfunction, but not those with atrioventricular block, had moderately better quality of life and cardiovascular functional status with dual-chamber pacing than with ventricular pacing. Trends of borderline statistical significance in clinical end points favoring dual-chamber pacing were observed in patients with sinus-node dysfunction, but not in those with atrioventricular block. Conclusions The implantation of a permanent pacemaker improves health-related quality of life. The quality-of-life benefits associated with dualchamber pacing as compared with ventricular pacing are observed principally in the subgroup of patients with sinus-node dysfunction. (N Engl J Med 1998;338:1097-104.

Ventricular pacing or dual-chamber pacing for sinus-node dysfunction

BACKGROUND Dual-chamber (atrioventricular) and single-chamber (ventricular) pacing are alternative treatment approaches for sinus-node dysfunction that causes clinically significant bradycardia. However, it is unknown which type of pacing results in the better outcome. METHODS We randomly assigned a total of 2010 patients with sinus-node dysfunction to dual-chamber pacing (1014 patients) or ventricular pacing (996 patients) and followed them for a median of 33.1 months. The primary end point was death from any cause or nonfatal stroke. Secondary end points included the composite of death, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure; atrial fibrillation; heart-failure score; the pacemaker syndrome; and the quality of life. RESULTS The incidence of the primary end point did not differ significantly between the dual-chamber group (21.5 percent) and the ventricular-paced group (23.0 percent, P=0.48). In patients assigned to dual-chamber pacing, the risk of atrial fibrillation was lower (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.94; P=0.008), and heart-failure scores were better (P CONCLUSIONS In sinus-node dysfunction, dual-chamber pacing does not improve stroke-free survival, as compared with ventricular pacing. However, dual-chamber pacing reduces the risk of atrial fibrillation, reduces signs and symptoms of heart failure, and slightly improves the quality of life. Overall, dual-chamber pacing offers significant improvement as compared with ventricular pacing

2007 Focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines

Late-breaking clinical trials presented at the 2005 and 2006 annual scientific meetings of the ACC, AHA, and European Society of Cardiology, as well as selected other data, were reviewed by the standing guideline writing committee along with the parent Task Force and other experts to identify those trials and other key data that might impact guidelines recommendations. On the basis of the criteria/considerations noted above, recent trial data and other clinical information were considered important enough to prompt a focused update of the 2004 ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarctio

ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction—Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction)

Although considerable improvement has occurred in the process of care for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), room for improvement exists (1–3). The purpose of the present guideline is to focus on the numerous advances in the diagnosis and management of patients with STEMI since 1999. This is reflected in the changed name of the guideline: “ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.” The final recommendations for indications for a diagnostic procedure, a particular therapy, or an intervention in patients with STEMI summarize both clinical evidence and expert opinion (Table 1).To provide clinicians with a set of recommendations that can easily be translated into the practice of caring for patients with STEMI, this guideline is organized around the chronology of the interface between the patient and the clinician. The full guideline is available at http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/stemi/index.htm