Editorial

This guest-edited Special Issue of RERM celebrates the enormous contribution that Professor Jeanette Rhedding-Jones made to the field of educational research over her life time

Conferencing otherwise: a feminist new materialist writing experiment

This paper attempts to reconfigure hegemonic framings of ‘the academic conference’ and thereby offer a means to (re-)encounter the spatial, temporal and affective forces that conferences generate, differently. We are a geographically dispersed but multiply entangled group of academic researchers united by theoretical fault lines within our work that seek to ask what if (Haraway, 2016) and what else (Manning, 2016). This ‘what if’ and ‘what else’ thinking has manifested in experimental and subversive doings otherwise at a series of academic conferences. The storying practices presented in this paper were made possible by the vital materialism (Bennett, 2010) of a shared google.doc. It was within this virtual environment that we attempted to weave diffractive accounts of what conferencing otherwise produces. This writing experiment offers a series of speculative provocations and counter-provocations to ask what else does conferencing make possible. This article is an invitation to the reader to plunge in and wallow (Taylor, 2016) within the speculative accounts which ensue and to contemplate the possibilities of breaking free from sedimented ways of neoliberal conferencing

The effect of tobacco smoking and treatment strategy on the one-year mortality of patients with acute non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of the present study was to investigate whether a previously shown survival benefit resulting from routine early invasive management of unselected patients with acute non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) may differ according to smoking status and age.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Post-hoc analysis of a prospective observational cohort study of consecutive patients admitted for NSTEMI in 2003 (conservative strategy cohort [CS]; n = 185) and 2006 (invasive strategy cohort [IS]; n = 200). A strategy for transfer to a high-volume invasive center and routine early invasive management was implemented in 2005. Patients were subdivided into current smokers and non-smokers (including ex-smokers) on admission.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The one-year mortality rate of smokers was reduced from 37% in the CS to 6% in the IS (p < 0.001), and from 30% to 23% for non-smokers (p = 0.18). Non-smokers were considerably older than smokers (median age 80 vs. 63 years, p < 0.001). The percentage of smokers who underwent revascularization (angioplasty or coronary artery bypass grafting) within 7 days increased from 9% in the CS to 53% in the IS (p < 0.001). The corresponding numbers for non-smokers were 5% and 27% (p < 0.001). There was no interaction between strategy and age (p = 0.25), as opposed to a significant interaction between strategy and smoking status (p = 0.024). Current smoking was an independent predictor of one-year mortality (hazard ratio 2.61, 95% confidence interval 1.43-4.79, p = 0.002).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The treatment effect of an early invasive strategy in unselected patients with NSTEMI was more pronounced among smokers than non-smokers. The benefit for smokers was not entirely explained by differences in baseline confounders, such as their younger age.</p

Impact of atrial fibrillation on clinical outcomes among patients with coronary artery disease undergoing revascularisation with drug-eluting stents

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are major determinants of morbidity and mortality. A combined treatment with antiplatelet agents and vitamin K antagonists limits the risk of stent thrombosis and stroke while increasing the rate of bleeding. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES)

The "smoker's paradox" in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Smokers have been shown to have lower mortality after acute coronary syndrome than non-smokers. This has been attributed to the younger age, lower co-morbidity, more aggressive treatment and lower risk profile of the smoker. Some studies, however, have used multivariate analyses to show a residual survival benefit for smokers; that is, the "smoker's paradox". The aim of this study was, therefore, to perform a systematic review of the literature and evidence surrounding the existence of the "smoker's paradox".</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Relevant studies published by September 2010 were identified through literature searches using EMBASE (from 1980), MEDLINE (from 1963) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, with a combination of text words and subject headings used. English-language original articles were included if they presented data on hospitalised patients with defined acute coronary syndrome, reported at least in-hospital mortality, had a clear definition of smoking status (including ex-smokers), presented crude and adjusted mortality data with effect estimates, and had a study sample of > 100 smokers and > 100 non-smokers. Two investigators independently reviewed all titles and abstracts in order to identify potentially relevant articles, with any discrepancies resolved by repeated review and discussion.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 978 citations were identified, with 18 citations from 17 studies included thereafter. Six studies (one observational study, three registries and two randomised controlled trials on thrombolytic treatment) observed a "smoker's paradox". Between the 1980s and 1990s these studies enrolled patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) according to criteria similar to the World Health Organisation criteria from 1979. Among the remaining 11 studies not supporting the existence of the paradox, five studies represented patients undergoing contemporary management.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The "smoker's paradox" was observed in some studies of AMI patients in the pre-thrombolytic and thrombolytic era, whereas no studies of a contemporary population with acute coronary syndrome have found evidence for such a paradox.</p

British randomised controlled trial of AV and VV optimization ("BRAVO") study:rationale, design, and endpoints

Background Echocardiographic optimization of pacemaker settings is the current standard of care for patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy. However, the process requires considerable time of expert staff. The BRAVO study is a non-inferiority trial comparing echocardiographic optimization of atrioventricular (AV) and interventricular (VV) delay with an alternative method using non-invasive blood pressure monitoring that can be automated to consume less staff resources. Methods/Design BRAVO is a multi-centre, randomized, cross-over, non-inferiority trial of 400 patients with a previously implanted cardiac resynchronization device. Patients are randomly allocated to six months in each arm. In the echocardiographic arm, AV delay is optimized using the iterative method and VV delay by maximizing LVOT VTI. In the haemodynamic arm AV and VV delay are optimized using non-invasive blood pressure measured using finger photoplethysmography. At the end of each six month arm, patients undergo the primary outcome measure of objective exercise capacity, quantified as peak oxygen uptake (VO2) on a cardiopulmonary exercise test. Secondary outcome measures are echocardiographic measurement of left ventricular remodelling, quality of life score and N-terminal pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-pro BNP). The study is scheduled to complete recruitment in December 2013 and to complete follow up in December 2014. Discussion If exercise capacity is non-inferior with haemodynamic optimization compared with echocardiographic optimization, it would be proof of concept that haemodynamic optimization is an acceptable alternative which has the potential to be more easily implemented

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)

Incidence and Severity of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing First-Time Coronary Angiography

In standard reference sources, the incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) ranged between 24 and 46.5%. Since then, the incidence of cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) has increased and modern treatment strategies ("pill in the pocket") are only applicable to patients without structural heart disease. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and severity of CAD in patients with AF.From January 2005 until December 2009, we included 261 consecutive patients admitted to hospital with paroxysmal, persistent or permanent AF in this prospective study. All patients underwent coronary angiography and the Framingham risk score (FRS) was calculated. Patients with previously diagnosed or previously excluded CAD were excluded.The overall incidence of CAD in patients presenting with AF was 34%; in patients >70 years, the incidence of CAD was 41%. The incidence of patients undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) was 21%. Patients with CAD were older (73±8 years vs 68±10 years, p = 0.001), had significantly more frequent hypercholesterolemia (60% vs 30%, p<0.001), were more frequent smokers (26% vs 13%, p = 0.017) and suffered from angina more often (37% vs 2%, p<0.001). There was a significant linear trend among the FRS categories in percentage and the prevalence of CAD and PCI/CABG (p<0.0001).The overall incidence of CAD in patients presenting with AF was relatively high at 34%; the incidence of PCI/CABG was 21%. Based upon increasing CRF in the western world, we recommend a careful investigation respecting the FRS to either definitely exclude or establish an early diagnosis of CAD--which could contribute to an early and safe therapeutic strategy considering type Ic antiarrhythmics and oral anticoagulation