Usporedba učinaka losartana i ramiprila u liječenju akutnoga infarkta srca s elevacijom ST spojnice [The comparison of the efficacy of ramipril and losartan in treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction]

Objectives. The use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or an angiotensinreceptor antagonists (ARBs) reduces the incidence of heart failure and the risk of thrombosis after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) blockade of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system (RAAS).There are some differences between ACE-I and ARBs, as more than 75% of angiotensin II in human myocardium originates from the alternative pathway influenced only by ARB. Goal. To compare the effect of 8-week and 6-month treatment of AMI patients with ramipril and losartan on laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure. Patients and methods.108 patients who suffered an STEMI were randomized in a ramipril (55) and a losartan (53) group, and followed-up for 8 weeks and 6 months. During treatment the effect of drugs on clinical (Killip-Kimbal classes), laboratory markers (NT-pro BNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) and echocardiographical parameters (EFLV, LVEDD) were compared. Results. No statistically significant differences in the levels of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure were observed between the ramipril and the losartan group, neither after 8-week nor after 6-month treatment. Conclusions. After an uncomplicated STEMI, losartan was equally effective as ramipril in terms of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure

Usporedba učinaka losartana i ramiprila u liječenju akutnoga infarkta srca s elevacijom ST spojnice [The comparison of the efficacy of ramipril and losartan in treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction]

Objectives. The use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or an angiotensinreceptor antagonists (ARBs) reduces the incidence of heart failure and the risk of thrombosis after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) blockade of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system (RAAS).There are some differences between ACE-I and ARBs, as more than 75% of angiotensin II in human myocardium originates from the alternative pathway influenced only by ARB. Goal. To compare the effect of 8-week and 6-month treatment of AMI patients with ramipril and losartan on laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure. Patients and methods.108 patients who suffered an STEMI were randomized in a ramipril (55) and a losartan (53) group, and followed-up for 8 weeks and 6 months. During treatment the effect of drugs on clinical (Killip-Kimbal classes), laboratory markers (NT-pro BNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) and echocardiographical parameters (EFLV, LVEDD) were compared. Results. No statistically significant differences in the levels of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure were observed between the ramipril and the losartan group, neither after 8-week nor after 6-month treatment. Conclusions. After an uncomplicated STEMI, losartan was equally effective as ramipril in terms of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure

Expression of Cellulosome Components and Type IV Pili within the Extracellular Proteome of Ruminococcus flavefaciens 007

Funding: The Rowett Institute receives funding from SG-RESAS (Scottish Government Rural and Environmental Science and Analysis Service). Visit of M.V. was supported by research grants from FEMS and Slovene human resources development and scholarship funds. Parts of this work were funded by grants from the United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF), Jerusalem, Israel – BSF Energy Research grant to E.A.B. and B.A.W. and Regular BSF Research grants to R.L. and B.A.W. – and by the Israel Science Foundation (grant nos 966/09 and 159/07 291/08). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

EUNIS Habitat Classification: Expert system, characteristic species combinations and distribution maps of European habitats

Aim: The EUNIS Habitat Classification is a widely used reference framework for European habitat types (habitats), but it lacks formal definitions of individual habitats that would enable their unequivocal identification. Our goal was to develop a tool for assigning vegetation‐plot records to the habitats of the EUNIS system, use it to classify a European vegetation‐plot database, and compile statistically‐derived characteristic species combinations and distribution maps for these habitats. Location: Europe. Methods: We developed the classification expert system EUNIS‐ESy, which contains definitions of individual EUNIS habitats based on their species composition and geographic location. Each habitat was formally defined as a formula in a computer language combining algebraic and set‐theoretic concepts with formal logical operators. We applied this expert system to classify 1,261,373 vegetation plots from the European Vegetation Archive (EVA) and other databases. Then we determined diagnostic, constant and dominant species for each habitat by calculating species‐to‐habitat fidelity and constancy (occurrence frequency) in the classified data set. Finally, we mapped the plot locations for each habitat. Results: Formal definitions were developed for 199 habitats at Level 3 of the EUNIS hierarchy, including 25 coastal, 18 wetland, 55 grassland, 43 shrubland, 46 forest and 12 man‐made habitats. The expert system classified 1,125,121 vegetation plots to these habitat groups and 73,188 to other habitats, while 63,064 plots remained unclassified or were classified to more than one habitat. Data on each habitat were summarized in factsheets containing habitat description, distribution map, corresponding syntaxa and characteristic species combination. Conclusions: EUNIS habitats were characterized for the first time in terms of their species composition and distribution, based on a classification of a European database of vegetation plots using the newly developed electronic expert system EUNIS‐ESy. The data provided and the expert system have considerable potential for future use in European nature conservation planning, monitoring and assessment

The comparison of the efficacy of ramipril and losartan in treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Polazište. Nakon akutnoga infarkta miokarda s elevacijom ST spojnice (STEMI) blokada reninangiotenzinskoga sustava (RAS) putem inhibitora angiotenzin-konvertirajućega enzima (ACE-I) ili blokatora receptora angiotenzina II (ARB) smanjuje pojavu zatajenja srca i sklonost trombozi. Između djelovanja ACE-I-ja i ARB-a postoje razlike jer više od 75 % angiotenzina II u ljudskome miokardu nastaje alternativnim putom na koji ACE-I ne utječe. Cilj. Usporedba učinka liječenja bolesnika sa STEMI-jem ramiprilom i losartanom u razdoblju od 8 tjedana i 6 mjeseci s pomoću laboratorijskih biljega, kliničkih znakova i ehokardiografskih parametara zatajenja srca. Ispitanici i metode. 108 bolesnika nakon STEMI-ja randomizano je u skupinu od 55 bolesnika liječenih ramiprilom i skupinu od 53 bolesnika liječenih losartanom i praćeni su 8 tjedana, a 55 bolesnika i za 6 mjeseci. Tijekom liječenja uspoređen je utjecaj lijekova na kliničke znakove zatajenja srca (Killip-Kimballova kategorizacija), laboratorijske biljege (NT-proBNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) i ehokardiografske parametre zatajenja srca (EFLV, LVEDD). Rezultati. Između ramiprilske i losartanske skupine bolesnika nije utvrđena statistički značajna razlika u vrijednostima laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca nakon 8 tjedana i nakon 6 mjeseci liječenja. Zaključak. Nakon nekompliciranoga STEMI-ja losartan je podjednako učinkovit kao ramipril u pogledu laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca.Objectives. The use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or an angiotensinreceptor antagonists (ARBs) reduces the incidence of heart failure and the risk of thrombosis after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) blockade of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system (RAAS).There are some differences between ACE-I and ARBs, as more than 75% of angiotensin II in human myocardium originates from the alternative pathway influenced only by ARB. Goal. To compare the effect of 8-week and 6-month treatment of AMI patients with ramipril and losartan on laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure. Patients and methods.108 patients who suffered an STEMI were randomized in a ramipril (55) and a losartan (53) group, and followed-up for 8 weeks and 6 months. During treatment the effect of drugs on clinical (Killip-Kimbal classes), laboratory markers (NT-pro BNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) and echocardiographical parameters (EFLV, LVEDD) were compared. Results. No statistically significant differences in the levels of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure were observed between the ramipril and the losartan group, neither after 8-week nor after 6-month treatment. Conclusions. After an uncomplicated STEMI, losartan was equally effective as ramipril in terms of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure

The comparison of the efficacy of ramipril and losartan in treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Polazište. Nakon akutnoga infarkta miokarda s elevacijom ST spojnice (STEMI) blokada reninangiotenzinskoga sustava (RAS) putem inhibitora angiotenzin-konvertirajućega enzima (ACE-I) ili blokatora receptora angiotenzina II (ARB) smanjuje pojavu zatajenja srca i sklonost trombozi. Između djelovanja ACE-I-ja i ARB-a postoje razlike jer više od 75 % angiotenzina II u ljudskome miokardu nastaje alternativnim putom na koji ACE-I ne utječe. Cilj. Usporedba učinka liječenja bolesnika sa STEMI-jem ramiprilom i losartanom u razdoblju od 8 tjedana i 6 mjeseci s pomoću laboratorijskih biljega, kliničkih znakova i ehokardiografskih parametara zatajenja srca. Ispitanici i metode. 108 bolesnika nakon STEMI-ja randomizano je u skupinu od 55 bolesnika liječenih ramiprilom i skupinu od 53 bolesnika liječenih losartanom i praćeni su 8 tjedana, a 55 bolesnika i za 6 mjeseci. Tijekom liječenja uspoređen je utjecaj lijekova na kliničke znakove zatajenja srca (Killip-Kimballova kategorizacija), laboratorijske biljege (NT-proBNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) i ehokardiografske parametre zatajenja srca (EFLV, LVEDD). Rezultati. Između ramiprilske i losartanske skupine bolesnika nije utvrđena statistički značajna razlika u vrijednostima laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca nakon 8 tjedana i nakon 6 mjeseci liječenja. Zaključak. Nakon nekompliciranoga STEMI-ja losartan je podjednako učinkovit kao ramipril u pogledu laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca.Objectives. The use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or an angiotensinreceptor antagonists (ARBs) reduces the incidence of heart failure and the risk of thrombosis after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) blockade of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system (RAAS).There are some differences between ACE-I and ARBs, as more than 75% of angiotensin II in human myocardium originates from the alternative pathway influenced only by ARB. Goal. To compare the effect of 8-week and 6-month treatment of AMI patients with ramipril and losartan on laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure. Patients and methods.108 patients who suffered an STEMI were randomized in a ramipril (55) and a losartan (53) group, and followed-up for 8 weeks and 6 months. During treatment the effect of drugs on clinical (Killip-Kimbal classes), laboratory markers (NT-pro BNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) and echocardiographical parameters (EFLV, LVEDD) were compared. Results. No statistically significant differences in the levels of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure were observed between the ramipril and the losartan group, neither after 8-week nor after 6-month treatment. Conclusions. After an uncomplicated STEMI, losartan was equally effective as ramipril in terms of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure

The comparison of the efficacy of ramipril and losartan in treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Polazište. Nakon akutnoga infarkta miokarda s elevacijom ST spojnice (STEMI) blokada reninangiotenzinskoga sustava (RAS) putem inhibitora angiotenzin-konvertirajućega enzima (ACE-I) ili blokatora receptora angiotenzina II (ARB) smanjuje pojavu zatajenja srca i sklonost trombozi. Između djelovanja ACE-I-ja i ARB-a postoje razlike jer više od 75 % angiotenzina II u ljudskome miokardu nastaje alternativnim putom na koji ACE-I ne utječe. Cilj. Usporedba učinka liječenja bolesnika sa STEMI-jem ramiprilom i losartanom u razdoblju od 8 tjedana i 6 mjeseci s pomoću laboratorijskih biljega, kliničkih znakova i ehokardiografskih parametara zatajenja srca. Ispitanici i metode. 108 bolesnika nakon STEMI-ja randomizano je u skupinu od 55 bolesnika liječenih ramiprilom i skupinu od 53 bolesnika liječenih losartanom i praćeni su 8 tjedana, a 55 bolesnika i za 6 mjeseci. Tijekom liječenja uspoređen je utjecaj lijekova na kliničke znakove zatajenja srca (Killip-Kimballova kategorizacija), laboratorijske biljege (NT-proBNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) i ehokardiografske parametre zatajenja srca (EFLV, LVEDD). Rezultati. Između ramiprilske i losartanske skupine bolesnika nije utvrđena statistički značajna razlika u vrijednostima laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca nakon 8 tjedana i nakon 6 mjeseci liječenja. Zaključak. Nakon nekompliciranoga STEMI-ja losartan je podjednako učinkovit kao ramipril u pogledu laboratorijskih biljega, ehokardiografskih parametara i kliničkih znakova zatajenja srca.Objectives. The use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) or an angiotensinreceptor antagonists (ARBs) reduces the incidence of heart failure and the risk of thrombosis after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) blockade of the renin-angiotensinaldosterone system (RAAS).There are some differences between ACE-I and ARBs, as more than 75% of angiotensin II in human myocardium originates from the alternative pathway influenced only by ARB. Goal. To compare the effect of 8-week and 6-month treatment of AMI patients with ramipril and losartan on laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure. Patients and methods.108 patients who suffered an STEMI were randomized in a ramipril (55) and a losartan (53) group, and followed-up for 8 weeks and 6 months. During treatment the effect of drugs on clinical (Killip-Kimbal classes), laboratory markers (NT-pro BNP, PAI-1, lipidogram) and echocardiographical parameters (EFLV, LVEDD) were compared. Results. No statistically significant differences in the levels of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure were observed between the ramipril and the losartan group, neither after 8-week nor after 6-month treatment. Conclusions. After an uncomplicated STEMI, losartan was equally effective as ramipril in terms of laboratory markers, echocardiographic parameters and clinical signs of heart failure

Factors of hospital mortality in men and women with ST-elevation myocardial infarction - an observational, retrospective, single centre study

Purpose: There are well-known gender differences in mortality of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Our purpose was to assess factors of hospital mortality separately for men and women with STEMI, which are less well known. Patients and Methods: In 2018– 2019, 485 men and 214 women with STEMI underwent treatment with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We retrospectively compared baseline characteristics, treatments and hospital complications between men and women, as well as between nonsurviving and surviving men and women with STEMI. Results: Primary PCI was performed in 94% of men and 91.1% of women with STEMI, respectively. The in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in women than in men (14% vs 8%, p=0.019). Hospital mortality in both genders was associated significantly to older age, heart failure, prior resuscitation, acute kidney injury, to less likely performed and less successful primary PCI and additionally in men to hospital infection and in women to bleeding. In men and women ≥ 65 years, mortality was similar (13.3% vs 17.8%, p = 0.293). Conclusion: Factors of hospital mortality were similar in men and women with STEMI, except bleeding was more likely observed in nonsurviving women and infection in nonsurviving men

STEMI patients in the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in northeast Slovenia - a retrospective, single-center observational study

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients in most countries. We aimed to retrospectively assess the admissions, treatments, complications, and mortality of STEMI patients in the northeast of Slovenia during the first (March–May 2020) and second waves (October–December 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic and to compare them with data from 2019 (March–October). Comparing 2019 and both waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed nonsignificant differences in the number of STEMI admissions, baseline characteristics, use of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within the first 3 (40.5%* vs. 38.7% vs. 25%*, *p = 0.074) or 6 h, TIMI III flow after primary PCI, and hospital complications, as well as significant increases in hospital heart failure (23.3% vs. 42%, p = 0.015) and mitral regurgitation in the second wave (10% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.008) of the pandemic and a nonsignificant increase in hospital mortality (8.9% vs. 9.4% vs. 13.6%) during both waves of the pandemic. We conclude that, due to the increased severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in the second wave, there were longer delays to primary PCI in STEMI patients, resulting in significantly increased hospital heart failure and non-significantly increased hospital mortality

Ramipril and Losartan Exert a Similar Long-Term Effect upon Markers of Heart Failure, Endogenous Fibrinolysis, and Platelet Aggregation in Survivors of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Single Centre Randomized Trial

Introduction. Blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients prevents heart failure and recurrent thrombosis. Our aim was to compare the effects of ramipril and losartan upon the markers of heart failure, endogenous fibrinolysis, and platelet aggregation in STEMI patients over the long term. Methods. After primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), 28 STEMI patients were randomly assigned ramipril and 27 losartan, receiving therapy for six months with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We measured N-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP), ejection fraction (EF), plasminogen-activator-inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1), and platelet aggregation by closure times (CT) at the baseline and after six months. Results. Baseline NT-proBNP ≥ 200 pmol/mL was observed in 48.1% of the patients, EF < 55% in 49.1%, and PAI-1 ≥ 3.5 U/mL in 32.7%. Six-month treatment with ramipril or losartan resulted in a similar effect upon PAI-1, NT-proBNP, EF, and CT levels in survivors of STEMI, but in comparison to control group, receiving DAPT alone, ramipril or losartan treatment with DAPT significantly increased mean CT (226.7 ± 80.3 sec versus 158.1 ± 80.3 sec, p<0.05). Conclusions. Ramipril and losartan exert a similar effect upon markers of heart failure and endogenous fibrinolysis, and, with DAPT, a more efficient antiplatelet effect in long term than DAPT alone