Nivel de conocimientos de estudiantes de medicina sobre diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardio

Introduction: acute myocardial infarction is a disease with high morbidity and mortality.Objective: to determine the knowledge level of medical students about the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Method: an observational, descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out between January and February 2022 in medical students from the University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río who participated in the provincial update workshop on acute myocardial infarction. Through intentional sampling, a sample of 92 students was selected. To collect the information, a survey was used using Google Forms.Results: the female sex (65,21%), the age group from 21 to 22 years (65,21%) and the fourth-year students (50%) prevailed. Hypertension was the most identified risk factor (97,98%). 97,82% of the students identified precordial pain as the main clinical manifestation. 100% identified the presentation with complications, where sudden death was the most identified (81,52%). 100% point to the electrocardiogram as the main complementary, where ST alterations were the most identified (84,78%). 95,65% of the students indicated constant monitoring of vital parameters and cardiovascular function as the management measure.Conclusions: Medicine students belonging to the clinical area at the University of Medical Sciences of Pinar del Río have an adequate level of knowledge about the diagnosis and management of acute myocardial infarction.Introducción: el infarto agudo del miocardio constituye una enfermedad con elevada morbilidad y mortalidad.Objetivo: determinar el nivel de conocimientos de estudiantes de medicina sobre el diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardioMétodo: se realizó un estudio observacional, descriptivo y transversal entre enero y febrero de 2022 en estudiantes de Medicina de la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río del ciclo clínico que participaron en el Taller provincial de actualización sobre infarto agudo de miocardio. Mediante un muestreo intencional se seleccionó una muestra de 92 estudiantes. Para la recolección de la información se empleó una encuesta mediante Google Forms.Resultados: predominó el sexo femenino (65,21 %), el grupo etario de 21 a 22 años (65,21 %) y los estudiantes de cuarto año (50 %). La hipertensión fue el factor de riesgo más identificado (97,98 %). El 97,82 % de los estudiantes identificó el dolor precordial como principal manifestación clínica. El 100 % identificó la presentación con complicaciones, donde la muerte súbita fue la más identificada (81,52 %). El 100 % señala al electrocardiograma como principal complementario, donde las alteraciones del ST fueron las más identificada (84,78 %). El 95,65 % de los estudiantes indicaron la monitorización constante de los parámetros vitales y función cardiovascular como la medida de manejo.Conclusiones: los estudiantes de Medicina pertenecientes al área clínica en la Universidad de Ciencias Médicas de Pinar del Río poseen un adecuado nivel de conocimientos sobre el diagnóstico y manejo del infarto agudo del miocardio.  

Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis

Background: Stroke is the third leading cause of death and the most common cause of long‐term disability. Severe narrowing (stenosis) of the carotid artery is an important cause of stroke. Surgical treatment (carotid endarterectomy) may reduce the risk of stroke, but carries a risk of operative complications. This is an update of a Cochrane Review, originally published in 1999, and most recently updated in 2017. Objectives: To determine the balance of benefit versus risk of endarterectomy plus best medical management compared with best medical management alone, in people with a recent symptomatic carotid stenosis (i.e. transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non‐disabling stroke). Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal to October 2019. We also reviewed the reference lists of all relevant studies and abstract books from research proceedings. Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carotid artery surgery plus best medical treatment with best medical treatment alone. Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted the data. We assessed the results and the quality of the evidence of the primary and secondary outcomes by the GRADE method, which classifies the quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. Main Results: We included three trials involving 6343 participants. The trials differed in the methods of measuring carotid stenosis and in the definition of stroke. Using the primary electronic data files, we pooled and analysed individual patient data on 6092 participants (35,000 patient‐years of follow‐up), after reassessing the carotid angiograms and outcomes from all three trials, and redefining outcome events where necessary, to achieve comparability. Surgery increased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with less than 30% stenosis (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99 to 1.56; 2 studies, 1746 participants; high‐quality evidence). Surgery decreased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with 30% to 49% stenosis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.19; 2 studies, 1429 participants; high‐quality evidence), was of benefit in participants with 50% to 69% stenosis (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94; 3 studies, 1549 participants; moderate‐quality evidence), and was highly beneficial in participants with 70% to 99% stenosis without near‐occlusion (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.67; 3 studies, 1095 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). However, surgery decreased the five‐year risk of any stroke or operative death in participants with near‐occlusions (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.53; 2 studies, 271 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). Authors' Conclusions: Carotid endarterectomy reduced the risk of recurrent stroke for people with significant stenosis. Endarterectomy might be of some benefit for participants with 50% to 69% symptomatic stenosis (moderate‐quality evidence) and highly beneficial for those with 70% to 99% stenosis (moderate‐quality evidence).</p

Patches of different types for carotid patch angioplasty

Background Extracranial carotid artery stenosis is the major cause of stroke, which can lead to disability and mortality. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with carotid patch angioplasty is the most popular technique for reducing the risk of stroke. Patch material may be made from an autologous vein, bovine pericardium, or synthetic material including polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), Dacron, polyurethane, and polyester. This is an update of a review that was first published in 1996 and was last updated in 2010. Objectives To assess the safety and efficacy of different types of patch materials used in carotid patch angioplasty. The primary hypothesis was that a synthetic material was associated with lower risk of patch rupture versus venous patches, but that venous patches were associated with lower risk of perioperative stroke and early or late infection, or both. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched 25 May 2020); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2020, Issue 4), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (1966 to 25 May 2020); Embase (1980 to 25 May 2020); the Index to Scientific and Technical Proceedings (1980 to 2019); the Web of Science Core Collection; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal. We hand-searched relevant journals and conference proceedings, checked reference lists, and contacted experts in the field. Selection criteria Randomised and quasi‐randomised trials (RCTs) comparing one type of carotid patch with another for CEA. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed eligibility, risk of bias, and trial quality; extracted data; and determined the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Outcomes, for example, perioperative ipsilateral stroke and long‐term ipsilateral stroke (at least one year), were collected and analysed. Main results We included 14 trials involving a total of 2278 CEAs with patch closure operations: seven trials compared vein closure with PTFE closure, five compared Dacron grafts with other synthetic materials, and two compared bovine pericardium with other synthetic materials. In most trials, a patient could be randomised twice and could have each carotid artery randomised to different treatment groups. Synthetic patch compared with vein patch angioplasty Vein patch may have little to no difference in effect on perioperative ipsilateral stroke between synthetic versus vein materials, but the evidence is very uncertain (odds ratio (OR) 2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 6.38; 5 studies, 797 participants; very low‐quality evidence). Vein patch may have little to no difference in effect on long‐term ipsilateral stroke between synthetic versus vein materials, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.69 to 3.07; P = 0.33; 4 studies, 776 participants; very low‐quality evidence). Vein patch may increase pseudoaneurysm formation when compared with synthetic patch, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.49; 4 studies, 776 participants; very low‐quality evidence). However, the numbers involved were small. Dacron patch compared with other synthetic patch angioplasty Dacron versus PTFE patch materials PTFE patch may reduce the risk of perioperative ipsilateral stroke (OR 3.35, 95% CI 0.19 to 59.06; 2 studies, 400 participants; very low‐quality evidence). PTFE patch may reduce the risk of long‐term ipsilateral stroke (OR 1.52, 95% CI 0.25 to 9.27; 1 study, 200 participants; very low‐quality evidence). Dacron may result in an increase in perioperative combined stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (OR 4.41 95% CI 1.20 to 16.14; 1 study, 200 participants; low‐quality evidence) when compared with PTFE. Early arterial re‐stenosis or occlusion (within 30 days) was also higher for Dacron patches. During follow‐up for longer than one year, more 'any strokes' (OR 10.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 83.43; 2 studies, 304 participants; low‐quality evidence) and stroke/death (OR 6.06, 95% CI 1.31 to 28.07; 1 study, 200 participants; low‐quality evidence) were reported with Dacron patch closure, although numbers of outcome events were small. Dacron patch may increase the risk of re‐stenosis when compared with other synthetic materials (especially with PTFE), but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 3.73, 95% CI 0.71 to 19.65; 3 studies, 490 participants; low‐quality evidence). Bovine pericardium patch compared with other synthetic patch angioplasty Bovine pericardium versus PTFE patch materials Evidence suggests that bovine pericardium patch results in a reduction in long‐term ipsilateral stroke (OR 4.17, 95% CI 0.46 to 38.02; 1 study, 195 participants; low‐quality evidence). Bovine pericardial patch may reduce the risk of perioperative fatal stroke, death, and infection compared to synthetic material (OR 5.16, 95% CI 0.24 to 108.83; 2 studies, 290 participants; low‐quality evidence for PTFE, and low‐quality evidence for Dacron; OR 4.39, 95% CI 0.48 to 39.95; 2 studies, 290 participants; low‐quality evidence for PTFE, and low‐quality evidence for Dacron; OR 7.30, 95% CI 0.37 to 143.16; 1 study, 195 participants; low‐quality evidence, respectively), but the numbers of outcomes were small. The evidence is very uncertain about effects of the patch on infection outcomes. Authors' conclusions The number of outcome events is too small to allow conclusions, and more trial data are required to establish whether any differences do exist. Nevertheless, there is little to no difference in effect on perioperative and long‐term ipsilateral stroke between vein and any synthetic patch material. Some evidence indicates that other synthetic patches (e.g. PTFE) may be superior to Dacron grafts in terms of perioperative stroke and TIA rates, and both early and late arterial re‐stenosis and occlusion. Pseudoaneurysm formation may be more common after use of a vein patch than after use of a synthetic patch. Bovine pericardial patch, which is an acellular xenograft material, may reduce the risk of perioperative fatal stroke, death, and infection compared to other synthetic patches. Further large RCTs are required before definitive conclusions can be reached.</p