Spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of refractory angina pectoris: a multicenter randomized single-blind study (the SCS-ITA trial)

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is believed to be effective in treating refractory angina. The need for SCS-related chest paresthesia, however, has hitherto made impossible placebo-controlled trials. Subliminal (non paresthesic) SCS, however, might be also effective on anginal pain. In this trial we compared subliminal SCS with paresthesic SCS and with sham SCS. Twenty-five refractory angina patients, who had never received SCS before, underwent SCS device implantation and were randomized to three groups: paresthesic SCS (group PS; n=10), subliminal SCS (group SS; n=7) or "sham" SCS (group NS; n=8). After 1month group NS patients were randomized to either group PS or SS. After 1month, changes in angina episodes (p=0.016), nitroglycerin use (p=0.015), angina class (p=0.02), quality of life score (p=0.05), and items 2 (p=0.008) and 3 (p=0.009) of Seattle angina questionnaire differed significantly among groups. Group PS showed significant improvement in outcomes compared to group NS, whereas there were no significant differences between groups SS and NS; furthermore, only nitroglycerin use differed significantly between groups PS and SS. At 3months, a significant difference between groups PS and SS was observed in angina attacks (p=0.002), but not in other variables. Thus, in this study, paresthesic, but not subliminal SCS was superior to sham SCS in improving clinical status in refractory angina patients. The lack of significant differences between PS and SS groups in this small study suggests that a possible role for subliminal SCS in individual patients deserves to be assessed in larger trials with appropriate statistical power. Copyright \ua9 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

[ANMCO/FADOI/SIAARTI/SIC/SIMG/SIMI/SIMEU consensus document: The clinical care pathway of acute heart failure patients from symptom onset to discharge from the emergency department]

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a relevant burden for emergency departments worldwide. AHF patients have markedly worse long-term outcomes than patients with other acute cardiac diseases (e.g. acute coronary syndromes); mortality or readmissions rates at 3 months approximate 33%, whereas 1-year mortality from index discharge ranges from 25% to 50%.The multiplicity of healthcare professionals acting across the care pathway of AHF patients represents a critical factor, which generates the need for integrating the different expertise and competence of general practitioners, emergency physicians, cardiologists, internists, and intensive care physicians to focus on care goals able to improve clinical outcomes.This consensus document results from the cooperation of the scientific societies representing the different healthcare professionals involved in the care of AHF patients and describes shared strategies and pathways aimed at ensuring both high quality care and better outcomes. The document describes the patient journey from symptom onset to the clinical suspicion of AHF and home management or referral to emergency care and transportation to the hospital, through the clinical diagnostic pathway in the emergency department, acute treatment, risk stratification and discharge from the emergency department to ordinary wards or home. The document analyzes the potential role of a cardiology fast-track and Observation Units and the transition to outpatient care by general practitioners and specialist heart failure clinics.The increasing care burden and complex problems generated by AHF are unlikely to be solved without an integrated multidisciplinary approach. Efficient networking among emergency departments, intensive care units, ordinary wards and primary care settings is crucial to achieve better outcomes. Thanks to the joint effort of qualified scientific societies, this document aims to achieve this goal through an integrated, shared and applicable pathway that will contribute to a homogeneous care management of AHF patients across the country

[ANMCO/SICI-GISE/SIC/SIECVI/SIRM Consensus document: Appropriateness of multimodality imaging in cardiovascular disease]

The complexity of cardiovascular diseases has led to an extensive use of technological instruments and the development of multimodality imaging. This extensive use of different cardiovascular imaging tests in the same patient has increased costs and waiting times.The concept of appropriateness has changed over time. Appropriateness criteria address the need for specific cardiovascular imaging tests in well-defined clinical scenarios, and define the kind of cardiovascular imaging that is appropriated for each clinical scenario in different stages of the disease. The concept of appropriateness criteria has replaced the old idea of appropriate use criteria and reflects the increasing effort of the international Scientific Societies to create and review in a critical way the management of diagnostic tests used by clinicians.The aim of this Italian consensus document is to address the use of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis and management of the major cardiovascular clinical scenarios, taking into consideration not only the international guidelines and scientific documents already published, but also the reality of Italian laws as well as the various professional profiles involved in patient management and availability of technological diagnostic instruments