Effects of chronic inflammatory bowel diseases on left ventricular structure and function: a study protocol

BACKGROUND: Experimental evidences suggest an increased collagen deposition in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). In particular, large amounts of collagen type I, III and V have been described and correlated to the development of intestinal fibrotic lesions. No information has been available until now about the possible increased collagen deposition far from the main target organ. In the hypothesis that chronic inflammation and increased collagen metabolism are reflected also in the systemic circulation, we aimed this study to evaluate the effects on left ventricular wall structure by assessing splancnic and systemic collagen metabolism (procollagen III assay), deposition (ultrasonic tissue characterization), and cardiac function (echocardiography) in patients with different long standing history of IBD, before and after surgery. METHODS: Thirty patients affected by active IBD, 15 with Crohn and 15 with Ulcerative Colitis, submitted to surgery will be enrolled in the study in a double blind fashion. They will be studied before the surgical operation and 6, 12 months after surgery. A control group of 15 healthy age and gender-matched subjects will also be studied. At each interval blood samples will be collected in order to assess the collagen metabolism; a transthoracic echocardiogram will be recorded for the subsequent determination of cardiac function and collagen deposition. DISCUSSION: From this study protocol we expect additional information about the association between IBD and cardiovascular disorders; in particular to address the question if chronic inflammation, through the altered collagen metabolism, could affect left ventricular structure and function in a manner directly related to the estimated duration of the disease

Do men benefit more than women from an interventional strategy in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction? The impact of gender in the RITA 3 trial.

AIMS: The RITA 3 trial randomized patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina to strategies of early intervention (angiography followed by revascularization) or conservative care (ischaemia or symptom driven angiography). The aim of this analysis was to investigate the impact of gender on the effect of these two strategies. METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 1810 patients (682 women and 1128 men) were randomized. The risk factor profile of women at presentation was markedly different to men. There was evidence that men benefited more from an early intervention strategy for death or non-fatal myocardial infarction at 1 year (adjusted odds ratios 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.41-0.98 for men and 1.79, 95% confidence interval 0.95-3.35 for women; interaction p-value=0.007). Men who underwent the assigned angiogram were more likely to be put forward for coronary artery bypass surgery, even after allowing for differences in disease severity. CONCLUSION: An early intervention strategy resulted in a beneficial effect in men which was not seen in women although caution is needed in interpretation. Further research is needed to evaluate why women do not appear to benefit from early intervention and to identify treatments that improve the prognosis of women

5-year outcome of an interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial

BACKGROUND: The long-term outcome of an interventional strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome is unknown. We tested whether an interventional strategy (routine angiography followed by revascularisation) was better than a conservative strategy (ischaemia-driven or symptom-driven angiography) over 5 years' follow-up. METHODS: In a multicentre randomised trial, 1810 patients (from 45 hospitals in England and Scotland, UK) with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned to receive an early intervention (n=895) or a conservative strategy (n=915) within 48 h of the index episode of cardiac pain. In each group, the aim was to provide the best medical treatment, and also to undertake coronary arteriography within 72 h in the interventional strategy with subsequent management guided by the angiographic findings. Analysis was by intention to treat and the primary outcome (composite of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction) had masked independent adjudication. RITA 3 has been assigned the International Standard Randomised Control Trial Number ISRCTN07752711. FINDINGS: At 1-year follow-up, rates of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction were similar. However, at a median of 5 years' follow-up (IQR 4.6-5.0), 142 (16.6%) patients with intervention treatment and 178 (20.0%) with conservative treatment died or had non-fatal myocardial infarction (odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.61-0.99, p=0.044), with a similar benefit for cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction (0.74, 0.56-0.97, p=0.030). 234 (102 [12%] intervention, 132 [15%] conservative) patients died during follow-up (0.76, 0.58-1.00, p=0.054). The benefits of an intervention strategy were mainly seen in patients at high risk of death or myocardial infarction (p=0.004), and for the highest risk group, the odds ratio of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction was 0.44 (0.25-0.76). INTERPRETATION: In patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome, a routine invasive strategy leads to long-term reduction in risk of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, and this benefit is mainly in high-risk patients. The findings provide support for national and international guidelines in the need for more robust risk stratification in acute coronary syndrome

Interventional versus conservative treatment in acute non‐ST elevation coronary syndrome: time course of patient management and disease events over one year in the RITA 3 trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether, in acute non‐ST elevation coronary syndrome, the benefit from early invasive coronary intervention compared with a conservative strategy of later symptom‐guided intervention varies over time. METHODS: In RITA 3 (Randomised Intervention Trial of unstable Angina 3) patients were randomly assigned to coronary angiography (median 2 days after randomisation) and appropriate intervention (n  =  895) or to a symptom‐guided conservative strategy (n  =  915). RESULTS: In the first week patients in both groups were at highest risk of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or refractory angina (incidence rate 40 times higher than in months 5–12 of follow up). There were 22 MIs and 6 deaths in the intervention group (largely due to procedure‐related events, 14 MIs and 3 deaths) versus 17 MIs and 3 deaths in the conservative group. In the rest of the year there were an additional 12 versus 27 MIs, respectively (treatment–time interaction p  =  0.021). Over one year in the intervention group there was a 43% reduction in refractory angina; 22% of patients underwent coronary artery bypass surgery and 35% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention only, which reduced refractory angina but provoked some early MIs; and 43% were still treated medically, mostly because of a favourable initial angiogram. CONCLUSION: Any intervention policy needs to recognise the high risk of events in the first week and the substantial minority of patients not needing intervention. Intervention may be best targeted at higher risk patients, as the early hazards of the procedure are then offset by reduced subsequent events

Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Randomized Intervention Trial of unstable Angina.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines suggest that, for patients at moderate risk of death from unstable coronary-artery disease, either an interventional strategy (angiography followed by revascularisation) or a conservative strategy (ischaemia-driven or symptom-driven angiography) is appropriate. We aimed to test the hypothesis that an interventional strategy is better than a conservative strategy in such patients. METHODS: We did a randomised multicentre trial of 1810 patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (mean age 62 years, 38% women). Patients were assigned an early intervention or conservative strategy. The antithrombin agent in both groups was enoxaparin. The co-primary endpoints were a combined rate of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or refractory angina at 4 months; and a combined rate of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: At 4 months, 86 (9.6%) of 895 patients in the intervention group had died or had a myocardial infarction or refractory angina, compared with 133 (14.5%) of 915 patients in the conservative group (risk ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.85, p=0.001). This difference was mainly due to a halving of refractory angina in the intervention group. Death or myocardial infarction was similar in both treatment groups at 1 year (68 [7.6%] vs 76 [8.3%], respectively; risk ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.67-1.25, p=0.58). Symptoms of angina were improved and use of antianginal medications significantly reduced with the interventional strategy (p<0.0001). INTERPRETATION: In patients presenting with unstable coronary-artery disease, an interventional strategy is preferable to a conservative strategy, mainly because of the halving of refractory or severe angina, and with no increased risk of death or myocardial infarction