Shift Work Including Night Work and Long Working Hours in Industrial Plants Increases the Risk of Atherosclerosis

There is an abundance of literature reporting an association between shift work and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Few studies have examined early manifestation of CVD using advanced modern methodology. We established a group of 65 shift workers and 29 day workers (controls) in two industrial plants. For the shift workers, the shift schedule includes rotating shifts with day, evening and nightshifts, some day and nightshifts lasting for 12 h. The current paper describes cross-sectional data in a study running for three years. We collected background data by questionnaire and measured blood pressure, heart rate, lipids, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and C-reactive protein (CRP). We examined arterial stiffness (central blood pressure, augmentation pressure and index, and pulse wave velocity) by the use of SphygmoCor® (AtCor Medical Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia) and the carotid arteries by ultrasound. We assessed VO2max by bicycle ergometry. We applied linear and logistic regression to evaluate associations between total number of years in shift work and cardiovascular outcome measures. The day workers were older and had more pronounced arterial stiffness compared to the shift workers. Number of years as a shift worker was associated with increased carotid intima media thickness (max IMT) (B = 0.015, p = 0.009) and an elevated CRP (B = 0.06, p = 0.03). Within the normal range for this age group, VO2max was 41 (9) ml/kg/min. Rotating shift work including day and night shifts lasting up to 12 h and evening shifts are associated with CVD-risk factors. This could imply an increased risk for coronary heart disease and stroke among these workers. Therefore, preventive measures should be considered for these groups of workers in order to prevent such diseases.publishedVersio

ESC core curriculum for the general cardiologist (2013)

[No abstract available

Rationale and design of EXPLORE: a randomized, prospective, multicenter trial investigating the impact of recanalization of a chronic total occlusion on left ventricular function in patients after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention, patients with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery were recently identified as a high-risk subgroup. It is unclear whether ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery should undergo additional percutaneous coronary intervention of the chronic total occlusion on top of optimal medical therapy shortly after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Possible beneficial effects include reduction in adverse left ventricular remodeling and preservation of global left ventricular function and improved clinical outcome during future coronary events.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The Evaluating Xience V and left ventricular function in Percutaneous coronary intervention on occLusiOns afteR ST-Elevation myocardial infarction (EXPLORE) trial is a randomized, prospective, multicenter, two-arm trial with blinded evaluation of endpoints. Three hundred patients after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery are randomized to either elective percutaneous coronary intervention of the chronic total occlusion within seven days or standard medical treatment. When assigned to the invasive arm, an everolimus-eluting coronary stent is used. Primary endpoints are left ventricular ejection fraction and left ventricular end-diastolic volume assessed by cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging at four months. Clinical follow-up will continue until five years.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The ongoing EXPLORE trial is the first randomized clinical trial powered to investigate whether recanalization of a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction results in a better preserved residual left ventricular ejection fraction, reduced end-diastolic volume and enhanced clinical outcome.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>trialregister.nl NTR1108.</p

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)

Cause of Death and Predictors of All-Cause Mortality in Anticoagulated Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation : Data From ROCKET AF

M. Kaste on työryhmän ROCKET AF Steering Comm jäsen.Background-Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intention-to-treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS(2) score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan-Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33-1.70, P= 75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51-1.90, P Conclusions-In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, approximate to 7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereasPeer reviewe

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)