7 research outputs found

    Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

    Get PDF
    To access publisher's full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field.The clinical effect of routine intracoronary thrombus aspiration before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is uncertain. We aimed to evaluate whether thrombus aspiration reduces mortality.We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial, with enrollment of patients from the national comprehensive Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) and end points evaluated through national registries. A total of 7244 patients with STEMI undergoing PCI were randomly assigned to manual thrombus aspiration followed by PCI or to PCI only. The primary end point was all-cause mortality at 30 days.No patients were lost to follow-up. Death from any cause occurred in 2.8% of the patients in the thrombus-aspiration group (103 of 3621), as compared with 3.0% in the PCI-only group (110 of 3623) (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.22; P=0.63). The rates of hospitalization for recurrent myocardial infarction at 30 days were 0.5% and 0.9% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.34 to 1.07; P=0.09), and the rates of stent thrombosis were 0.2% and 0.5%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.20 to 1.02; P=0.06). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the rate of stroke or neurologic complications at the time of discharge (P=0.87). The results were consistent across all major prespecified subgroups, including subgroups defined according to thrombus burden and coronary flow before PCI.Routine thrombus aspiration before PCI as compared with PCI alone did not reduce 30-day mortality among patients with STEMI. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01093404.).Swedish Research Council, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, Terumo Medical Corporation, Medtronic, Vascular Solutions, Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation/20100178/ B0010401 Biotronik, Stentys, Abbott Vascular, St. Jude Medical, Boston Scientific, EPS Vascular, Cardiac Dimensions, AstraZeneca, Edwards Lifesciences

    Factor analysis in predominantly severe COPD: Identification of disease heterogeneity by easily measurable characteristics

    Get PDF
    Background: The clinical and demographic variables defining the heterogeneity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are unclear. A post-hoc analysis of five randomised studies in patients with a history of previous exacerbations examined the clinical and demographic characteristics describing moderate-to-very-severe COPD. Methods: Factor analysis was performed on all continuous baseline demographic and clinical data, without variable selection. Analyses were based on the full cohort and on stratifications by pack-years smoked, smoking status, gender, and comorbidities; patient exacerbation history was analysed in two of the five studies. Findings: 6162 COPD patients were evaluated (70% male; 40% current smokers; mean pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 35.2% predicted). Baseline clinical and demographic variables loaded differentially on six factors with minimal overlap, explaining 60.4% of the heterogeneity: 1) symptoms (cough, dyspnoea, steep disturbance), health status, reliever use; 2) pre-bronchodilator FEV1, FEV1/forced vital capacity, morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), body mass index (BMI); 3) blood pressure; 4) age, months since first COPD symptoms; 5) PEF variability; 6) pulse, FEV1 reversibility. Most factors loaded similarly in stratified and exacerbation analyses. BMI loaded with reversibility in females, and with age and months since first COPD symptoms in ex-smokers. Exacerbations loaded to factor 6. Interpretation: Readily available data can explain similar to 60% of COPD heterogeneity in a large dataset of predominantly severe COPD patients. Factors were robust over determinants of disease outcome; gender, smoking status, pack-years smoked, and comorbidities. The main factors were largely unchanged by adding exacerbations. Only BMI loaded to other factors. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd

    A score to predict short-term risk of COPD exacerbations (SCOPEX)

    No full text
    Background: There is no clinically useful score to predict chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. We aimed to derive this by analyzing data from three existing COPD clinical trials of budesonide/formoterol, formoterol, or placebo in patients with moderate-tovery- severe COPD and a history of exacerbations in the previous year. Methods: Predictive variables were selected using Cox regression for time to first severe COPD exacerbation. We determined absolute risk estimates for an exacerbation by identifying variables in a binomial model, adjusting for observation time, study, and treatment. The model was further reduced to clinically useful variables and the final regression coefficients scaled to obtain risk scores of 0-100 to predict an exacerbation within 6 months. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the corresponding C-index were used to investigate the discriminatory properties of predictive variables. Results: The best predictors of an exacerbation in the next 6 months were more COPD maintenance medications prior to the trial, higher mean daily reliever use, more exacerbations during the previous year, lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio, and female sex. Using these risk variables, we developed a score to predict short-term (6-month) risk of COPD exacerbations (SCOPEX). Budesonide/formoterol reduced future exacerbation risk more than formoterol or as-needed short-acting beta(2)-agonist (salbutamol). Conclusion: SCOPEX incorporates easily identifiable patient characteristics and can be readily applied in clinical practice to target therapy to reduce COPD exacerbations in patients at the highest risk

    A score to predict short-term risk of COPD exacerbations (SCOPEX)

    Get PDF
    Background: There is no clinically useful score to predict chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. We aimed to derive this by analyzing data from three existing COPD clinical trials of budesonide/formoterol, formoterol, or placebo in patients with moderate-tovery- severe COPD and a history of exacerbations in the previous year. Methods: Predictive variables were selected using Cox regression for time to first severe COPD exacerbation. We determined absolute risk estimates for an exacerbation by identifying variables in a binomial model, adjusting for observation time, study, and treatment. The model was further reduced to clinically useful variables and the final regression coefficients scaled to obtain risk scores of 0-100 to predict an exacerbation within 6 months. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the corresponding C-index were used to investigate the discriminatory properties of predictive variables. Results: The best predictors of an exacerbation in the next 6 months were more COPD maintenance medications prior to the trial, higher mean daily reliever use, more exacerbations during the previous year, lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity ratio, and female sex. Using these risk variables, we developed a score to predict short-term (6-month) risk of COPD exacerbations (SCOPEX). Budesonide/formoterol reduced future exacerbation risk more than formoterol or as-needed short-acting beta(2)-agonist (salbutamol). Conclusion: SCOPEX incorporates easily identifiable patient characteristics and can be readily applied in clinical practice to target therapy to reduce COPD exacerbations in patients at the highest risk

    DETermination of the role of OXygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction trial.

    No full text
    The use of supplemental oxygen in the setting of suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is recommended in international treatment guidelines and established in prehospital and hospital clinical routine throughout the world. However, to date there is no conclusive evidence from adequately designed and powered trials supporting this practice. Existing data are conflicting and fail to clarify the role of supplemental oxygen in AMI

    Design and rationale of randomized evaluation of decreased usage of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (REDUCE-AMI)

    No full text
    Aims Most trials showing benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction (MI) included patients with large MIs and are from an era before modern biomarker-based MI diagnosis and reperfusion treatment. The aim of the randomized evaluation of decreased usage of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (REDUCE-AMI) trial is to determine whether long-term oral beta-blockade in patients with an acute MI and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) reduces the composite endpoint of death of any cause or recurrent MI. Methods and results It is a registry-based, randomized, parallel, open-label, multicentre trial performed at 38 centres in Sweden, 1 centre in Estonia, and 6 centres in New Zealand. About 5000 patients with an acute MI who have undergone coronary angiography and with EF &amp;gt;= 50% will be randomized to long-term treatment with beta-blockade or not. The primary endpoint is the composite endpoint of death of any cause or new non-fatal MI. There are several secondary endpoints, including all-cause death, cardiovascular death, new MI, readmission because of heart failure and atrial fibrillation, symptoms, functional status, and health-related quality of life after 6-10 weeks and after 1 year of treatment. Safety endpoints are bradycardia, AV-block II-III, hypotension, syncope or need for pacemaker, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke. Conclusion The results from REDUCE-AMI will add important evidence regarding the effect of beta-blockers in patients with MI and preserved EF and may change guidelines and clinical practice.Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2016-00493]; Swedish heart-and lung foundation [20210423]; Stockholm County Council; Estonian Research Council [PRG435]</p
    corecore