Journal of the American College of Cardiology
-
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialIn-hospital versus out-of-hospital presentation of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias predicts survival: results from the AVID Registry. Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators.
This study describes the outcomes of patients from the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID) Study Registry to determine how the location of ventricular arrhythmia presentation influences survival. ⋯ Compared with patients with out-of-hospital presentations of life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias not due to a reversible cause, patients with in-hospital presentations have a worse long-term prognosis. Because location of ventricular arrhythmia presentation is an independent predictor of long-term outcome, it should be considered as an element of risk stratification and when planning clinical trials.
-
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialImpaired coronary blood flow in nonculprit arteries in the setting of acute myocardial infarction. The TIMI Study Group. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction.
While attention has focused on coronary blood flow in the culprit artery in acute myocardia infarction (MI), flow in the nonculprit artery has not been studied widely, in part because it has been assumed to be normal. We hypothesized that slower flow in culprit arteries, larger territories infarcted and hemodynamic perturbations may be associated with slow flow in nonculprit arteries. ⋯ Acute MI slows flow globally, and slower global flow is associated with adverse outcomes. Relief of the culprit artery stenosis by PTCA restored culprit artery flow to that in the nonculprit artery, but both were 45% slower than normal flow.
-
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. · Oct 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialRelative effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with varying degrees of left ventricular dysfunction who have survived malignant ventricular arrhythmias. AVID Investigators. Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators.
We sought to assess the effect of baseline ejection fraction on survival difference between patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias who were treated with an antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). ⋯ These data suggest that patients with relatively well-preserved LVEF (> or =0.35) may not have better survival when treated with the ICD as compared with AADs. At a lower LVEF, the ICD appears to offer improved survival as compared with AADs. Prospective studies with larger patient numbers are needed to assess the effect of relatively well-preserved ejection fraction (> or =0.35) on the relative treatment effect of AADs and the ICDs.