| 31. |
- Ritsinger, Viveca, et al.
(författare)
-
Design and rationale of the myocardial infarction and new treatment with metformin study (MIMET) - Study protocol for a registry-based randomised clinical trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of diabetes and its complications. - : Elsevier. - 1056-8727 .- 1873-460X. ; 37:10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: To investigate if addition of metformin to standard care (life-style advice) reduces the occurrence of cardiovascular events and death after myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with newly detected prediabetes.Methods: The Myocardial Infarction and new treatment with Metformin study (MIMET) is a large multicentre registry-based randomised clinical trial (R-RCT) within the SWEDEHEART registry platform expected to include 5160 patients with MI and newly detected prediabetes (identified with fasting blood glucose, HbA1c or 2-h glucose on oral glucose tolerance test) at similar to 20 study sites in Sweden. Patients 18-80 years, without known diabetes and naive to glucose lowering therapy, will be randomised 1:1 to open-label metformin therapy plus standard care or standard care alone.Outcomes: Patients will be followed for 2 years for the primary outcome new cardiovascular event (first of death, non-fatal MI, hospitalisation for heart failure or non-fatal stroke). Secondary endpoints include individual components of the primary endpoint, diabetes diagnosis, initiation of any glucose lowering therapy, cancer, and treatment safety. Events will be collected from national healthcare registries.Conclusions: The MIMET study will investigate if metformin is superior to standard care after myocardial infarction in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with prediabetes (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05182970; EudraCT No: 2019-001487-30).
|
|
| 32. |
|
|
| 33. |
- Rubertsson, Sten, et al.
(författare)
-
Mechanical chest compressions and simultanous defibrillationvs conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitationin out-of hospital cardiac arrest:the LINC randomized trial
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : American Medical Association. - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 311:1, s. 53-61
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IMPORTANCE: A strategy using mechanical chest compressions might improve the poor outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, but such a strategy has not been tested in large clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether administering mechanical chest compressions with defibrillation during ongoing compressions (mechanical CPR), compared with manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (manual CPR), according to guidelines, would improve 4-hour survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter randomized clinical trial of 2589 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest conducted between January 2008 and February 2013 in 4 Swedish, 1 British, and 1 Dutch ambulance services and their referring hospitals. Duration of follow-up was 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either mechanical chest compressions (LUCAS Chest Compression System, Physio-Control/Jolife AB) combined with defibrillation during ongoing compressions (n = 1300) or to manual CPR according to guidelines (n = 1289). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Four-hour survival, with secondary end points of survival up to 6 months with good neurological outcome using the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score. A CPC score of 1 or 2 was classified as a good outcome. RESULTS: Four-hour survival was achieved in 307 patients (23.6%) with mechanical CPR and 305 (23.7%) with manual CPR (risk difference, -0.05%; 95% CI, -3.3% to 3.2%; P > .99). Survival with a CPC score of 1 or 2 occurred in 98 (7.5%) vs 82 (6.4%) (risk difference, 1.18%; 95% CI, -0.78% to 3.1%) at intensive care unit discharge, in 108 (8.3%) vs 100 (7.8%) (risk difference, 0.55%; 95% CI, -1.5% to 2.6%) at hospital discharge, in 105 (8.1%) vs 94 (7.3%) (risk difference, 0.78%; 95% CI, -1.3% to 2.8%) at 1 month, and in 110 (8.5%) vs 98 (7.6%) (risk difference, 0.86%; 95% CI, -1.2% to 3.0%) at 6 months with mechanical CPR and manual CPR, respectively. Among patients surviving at 6 months, 99% in the mechanical CPR group and 94% in the manual CPR group had CPC scores of 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, there was no significant difference in 4-hour survival between patients treated with the mechanical CPR algorithm or those treated with guideline-adherent manual CPR. The vast majority of survivors in both groups had good neurological outcomes by 6 months. In clinical practice, mechanical CPR using the presented algorithm did not result in improved effectiveness compared with manual CPR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00609778.
|
|
| 34. |
- Rubertsson, Sten, et al.
(författare)
-
Per-Protocol and Pre-Defined population analysis of the LINC study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 96, s. 92-99
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To perform two predefined sub-group analyses within the LINC study and evaluate if the results were supportive of the previous reported intention to treat (ITT) analysis.METHODS: Predefined subgroup analyses from the previously published LINC study were performed. The Per-Protocol population (PPP) included the randomized patients included in the ITT-population but excluding those with violated inclusion or exclusion criteria and those that did not get the actual treatment to which the patient was randomized. In the Pre-Defined population (PDP) analyses patients were also excluded if the dispatch time to ambulance arrival at the address exceeded 12min, there was a non-witnessed cardiac arrest, or if it was not possible to determine whether the arrest was witnessed or not, and those cases where LUCAS was not brought to the scene at the first instance.RESULTS: After exclusion from the 2589 patients within the ITT-population, the Per-Protocol analysis was performed in 2370 patients and the Pre-Defined analysis within 1133 patients. There was no significant difference in 4-h survival of patients between the mechanical-CPR group and the manual-CPR group in the Per-Protocol population; 279 of 1172 patients (23.8%) versus 281 of 1198 patients (23.5%) (risk difference -0.35%, 95% C.I. -3.1 to 3.8, p=0.85) or in the Pre-Defined population; 176 of 567 patients (31.0%) versus 192 of 566 patients (33.9%) (risk difference -2.88%, 95% C.I. -8.3 to 2.6, p=0.31). There was no difference in any of the second outcome variables analyzed in the Pre-Protocol or Pre-Defined populations.CONCLUSIONS: The results from these predefined sub-group analyses of the LINC study population did not show any difference in 4h survival or in secondary outcome variables between patients treated with mechanical-CPR or manual-CPR. This is consistent with the previously published ITT analysis.
|
|
| 35. |
- Sparv, David, et al.
(författare)
-
The Analgesic Effect of Oxygen in Suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction : A Substudy of the DETO2X-AMI Trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. - : Elsevier BV. - 1936-8798 .- 1876-7605. ; 39, s. 546-546
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: In this substudy of the DETO2X-AMI (An Efficacy and Outcome Study of Supplemental Oxygen Treatment in Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction) trial, the authors aimed to assess the analgesic effect of moderate-flow oxygen supplementation in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to study the effect of oxygen supplementation on the use of opiates and sedatives during PCI. Background: Routine oxygen in normoxemic patients with AMI does not provide clinical benefit. However, oxygen may relieve ischemic pain. Methods: Patients were randomly allocated to oxygen or ambient air according to the main study protocol. After PCI, peak level of pain during PCI was measured by the Visual Analogue Scale. The total amount of opiates and sedatives was reported. Results: A total of 622 patients were enrolled: 330 in the oxygen group and 292 in the ambient air group. There was no significant difference in peak level of pain (oxygen 4.0 [1.0 to 6.0] vs. air 3.0 [0.6 to 6.0]; p = 0.37), use of opiates (mg) (oxygen 0.0 [0.0 to 3.0] vs. air 0.0 [0.0 to 3.0]; p = 0.31), or use of sedatives between the groups (median [interquartile range]) (oxygen 2.5 [0.0 to 2.5] vs. air 2.5 [0.0 to 2.5]; p = 0.74). Conclusions: In the present study, the authors did not find any analgesic effect of routine oxygen as compared with ambient air, and no differences in the use of sedatives and opiates during PCI. Our results indicate that moderate-flow oxygen supplementation does not relieve pain in normoxemic patients with suspected AMI undergoing treatment with PCI and should thus not be used for this purpose.
|
|
| 36. |
- Sundström, Johan, Professor, 1971-, et al.
(författare)
-
Heterogeneity in Blood Pressure Response to 4 Antihypertensive Drugs : A Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 329:14, s. 1160-1160
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance Hypertension is the leading risk factor for premature death worldwide. Multiple blood pressure–lowering therapies are available but the potential for maximizing benefit by personalized targeting of drug classes is unknown.Objective To investigate and quantify the potential for targeting specific drugs to specific individuals to maximize blood pressure effects.Design, Setting, and Participants A randomized, double-blind, repeated crossover trial in men and women with grade 1 hypertension at low risk for cardiovascular events at an outpatient research clinic in Sweden. Mixed-effects models were used to assess the extent to which individuals responded better to one treatment than another and to estimate the additional blood pressure lowering achievable by personalized treatment.Interventions Each participant was scheduled for treatment in random order with 4 different classes of blood pressure–lowering drugs (lisinopril [angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor], candesartan [angiotensin-receptor blocker], hydrochlorothiazide [thiazide], and amlodipine [calcium channel blocker]), with repeated treatments for 2 classes.Main Outcomes and Measures Ambulatory daytime systolic blood pressure, measured at the end of each treatment period.Results There were 1468 completed treatment periods (median length, 56 days) recorded in 270 of the 280 randomized participants (54% men; mean age, 64 years). The blood pressure response to different treatments varied considerably between individuals (P < .001), specifically for the choices of lisinopril vs hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril vs amlodipine, candesartan vs hydrochlorothiazide, and candesartan vs amlodipine. Large differences were excluded for the choices of lisinopril vs candesartan and hydrochlorothiazide vs amlodipine. On average, personalized treatment had the potential to provide an additional 4.4 mm Hg–lower systolic blood pressure.Conclusions and Relevance These data reveal substantial heterogeneity in blood pressure response to drug therapy for hypertension, findings that may have implications for personalized therapy.
|
|
| 37. |
- Sundström, Johan, Professor, 1971-, et al.
(författare)
-
The Precision HYpertenSIon Care (PHYSIC) study : a double-blind, randomized, repeated cross-over study
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences. - : Uppsala Medical Society. - 0300-9734 .- 2000-1967. ; 124:1, s. 51-58
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- High blood pressure is the leading risk factor for premature deaths and a major cost to societies worldwide. Effective blood pressure-lowering drugs are available, but patient adherence to them is low, likely partly due to side effects. To identify patient-specific differences in treatment effects, a repeated cross-over design, where the same treatment contrasts are repeated within each patient, is needed. Such designs have been surprisingly rarely used, given the current focus on precision medicine. The Precision HYpertenSIon Care (PHYSIC) study aims to investigate if there is a consistent between-person variation in blood pressure response to the common blood pressure-lowering drug classes of a clinically relevant magnitude, given the within-person variation in blood pressure. The study will also investigate the between-person variation in side effects of the drugs. In a double-blind, randomized, repeated cross-over trial, 300 patients with mild hypertension will be treated with four blood pressure-lowering drugs (candesartan, lisinopril, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide) in monotherapy, with two of the drugs repeated for each patient. If the study indicates that there is a potential for precision hypertension care, the most promising predictors of blood pressure and side effect response to the drugs will be explored, as will the potential for development of a biomarker panel to rank the suitability of blood pressure-lowering drug classes for individual patients in terms of anticipated blood pressure effects and side effects, with the ultimate goal to maximize adherence. The study follows a protocol pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT02774460.
|
|
| 38. |
|
|
| 39. |
- Vedin, Ola, et al.
(författare)
-
Associations between tooth loss and prognostic biomarkers and the risk for cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary heart disease
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 245, s. 271-276
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background:Underlying mechanisms behind the hypothesized relationship between periodontal disease (PD) and coronary heart disease (CHD) have been insufficiently explored. We evaluated associations between self-reported tooth loss-a marker of PD- and prognostic biomarkers in 15,456 (97%) patients with stable CHD in the global STABILITY trial.Methods and results:Baseline blood samples were obtained and patients reported their number of teeth according to the following tooth loss levels: "26-32 (All)" [lowest level], "20-25", "15-19", "1-14", and "No Teeth" [highest level]. Linear and Cox regression models assessed associations between tooth loss levels and biomarker levels, and the relationship between tooth loss levels and outcomes, respectively.After multivariable adjustment, the relative biomarker increase between the highest and the lowest tooth loss level was: high-sensitivity C-reactive protein 1.21 (95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.29), interleukin 6 1.14 (1.10-1.18), lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) activity 1.05 (1.03-1.06), growth differentiation factor 15 1.11 (1.08-1.14), and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) 1.18 (1.11-1.25). No association was detected for high-sensitivity troponin T 1.02 (0.98-1.05). Some attenuation of the relationship between tooth loss and outcomes resulted from the addition of biomarkers to the multivariable analysis, of which NT-proBNP had the biggest impact.Conclusions:A graded and independent association between tooth loss and several prognostic biomarkers was observed, suggesting that tooth loss and its underlying mechanisms may be involved in multiple pathophysiological pathways also implicated in the development and prognosis of CHD. The association between tooth loss and cardiovascular death and stroke persisted despite comprehensive adjustment including prognostic biomarkers.
|
|
| 40. |
|
|
