| 1. |
- DAmario, Domenico, et al.
(författare)
-
Association between dosing and combination use of medications and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction : data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry
- 2022
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 24:5, s. 871-884
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims To assess the association between combination, dose and use of current guideline-recommended target doses (TD) of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi) and beta-blockers, and outcomes in a large and unselected contemporary cohort of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction. Methods and results Overall, 17 809 outpatients registered in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) from May 2000 to December 2018, with ejection fraction <40% and duration of HF >= 90 days were selected. Primary outcome was a composite of time to cardiovascular death and first HF hospitalization. Compared with no use of RASi or ARNi, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.83 (0.76-0.91) with <50% of TD, 0.78 (0.71-0.86) with 50%-99%, and 0.73 (0.67-0.80) with >= 100% of TD. Compared with no use of beta-blockers, the adjusted HR (95% CI) was 0.86 (0.76-0.91), 0.81 (0.74-0.89) and 0.74 (0.68-0.82) with <50%, 50%-99% and >= 100% of TD, respectively. Patients receiving both an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/ARNi and a beta-blocker at 50%-99% of TD had a lower adjusted risk of the primary outcome compared with patients only receiving one drug, i.e. ACEi/ARB/ARNi or beta-blocker, even if this was at >= 100% of TD. Conclusion Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients using higher doses of RASi or ARNi and beta-blockers had lower risk of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Use of two drug classes at 50%-99% of TD dose was associated with lower risk than one drug class at 100% of TD.
|
|
| 2. |
- Katus, Hugo, et al.
(författare)
-
Early diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 38:41, s. 3049-3055
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The diagnostic evaluation of acute chest pain has been augmented in recent years by advances in the sensitivity and precision of cardiac troponin assays, new biomarkers, improvements in imaging modalities, and release of new clinical decision algorithms. This progress has enabled physicians to diagnose or rule-out acute myocardial infarction earlier after the initial patient presentation, usually in emergency department settings, which may facilitate prompt initiation of evidence-based treatments, investigation of alternative diagnoses for chest pain, or discharge, and permit better utilization of healthcare resources. A non-trivial proportion of patients fall in an indeterminate category according to rule-out algorithms, and minimal evidence-based guidance exists for the optimal evaluation, monitoring, and treatment of these patients. The Cardiovascular Round Table of the ESC proposes approaches for the optimal application of early strategies in clinical practice to improve patient care following the review of recent advances in the early diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. The following specific 'indeterminate' patient categories were considered: (i) patients with symptoms and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin <99th percentile; (ii) patients with symptoms and high-sensitivity troponin <99th percentile but above the limit of detection; (iii) patients with symptoms and high-sensitivity troponin >99th percentile but without dynamic change; and (iv) patients with symptoms and high-sensitivity troponin >99th percentile and dynamic change but without coronary plaque rupture/erosion/dissection. Definitive evidence is currently lacking to manage these patients whose early diagnosis is 'indeterminate' and these areas of uncertainty should be assigned a high priority for research.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
