American heart journal
-
American heart journal · Apr 2013
Rate versus rhythm control for management of atrial fibrillation in clinical practice: results from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) registry.
All patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) require optimization of their ventricular rate. Factors leading to use of additional rhythm control in clinical practice have not been thoroughly defined. ⋯ In this outpatient registry of US clinical practice, the majority of patients with AF were managed with rate control alone. Patients with more symptoms and who were treated by an electrophysiologist were more likely to receive rhythm-control therapies. A significant proportion of AF patients, regardless of treatment strategy, were not treated with anticoagulation for thromboembolism prophylaxis.
-
American heart journal · Mar 2013
Multicenter Study Clinical TrialRisk stratification in patients with unstable angina using absolute serial changes of 3 high-sensitive troponin assays.
It is unknown whether unstable angina (UA) results in previously nondetectable low-level myocardial necrosis. We compared the pattern of myocardial necrosis between patients with UA, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and noncardiac chest pain (NCCP) using 3 high-sensitive cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays. ⋯ In marked contrast to patients with AMI, most patients with UA do not exhibit relevant hs-cTn changes. The minority of UA with hs-cTn changes, however, has a significantly worse short- and long-term outcome.
-
American heart journal · Mar 2013
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyClosed versus open cell stent for high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions in ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction: the Closed versus Open Cells stent for High risk percutaneous coronary Interventions in ST-Elevation acute myocardial infarction (COCHISE) pilot study.
Stent deployment may be associated with distal embolization and slow flow in coronary thrombotic lesions. There are no data on the risk of distal thrombus embolization according to the stent design. The aim was to evaluate coronary flow after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in acute myocardial infarction according to the employed stent (closed versus open cell design). ⋯ The use of a closed cell stent design rather than an open cell during PCI for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction is associated with better coronary angiographic flow after PCI.
-
American heart journal · Mar 2013
Multicenter StudyDetermining the risks of clinically indicated nonthoracic magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T for patients with pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: rationale and design of the MagnaSafe Registry.
Until recently, the presence of a permanent pacemaker or an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator has been a relative contraindication for the performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A number of small studies have shown that MRI can be performed with minimal risk when patients are properly monitored and device programming is modified appropriately for the procedure. However, the risk of performing MRI for patients with implanted cardiac devices has not been sufficiently evaluated to advocate routine clinical use. The aim of the present protocol is to prospectively determine the rate of adverse clinical events and device parameter changes in patients with implanted non-MRI-conditional cardiac devices undergoing clinically indicated nonthoracic MRI at 1.5 T. ⋯ The results of this registry will provide additional documentation of the risk of MRI and will further validate a clinical protocol for screening and the performance of clinically indicated MRI for patients with implanted cardiac devices.
-
American heart journal · Mar 2013
Comparative StudyCentral versus local adjudication of myocardial infarction in a cardiac biomarker trial.
The impact of regulatory requirements, which require central adjudication for the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in cardiac biomarker studies, is unclear. We determined the impact of local (at the site of subject enrollment) versus central adjudication of AMI on final diagnosis. ⋯ Despite an acceptable κ, over a third of patients with a diagnosis of AMI were not assigned that diagnosis by both sets of adjudicators. This supports the importance of 1 standard method for diagnosis of AMI.