SwePub
Tyck till om SwePub Sök här!
Sök i SwePub databas

  Extended search

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Patel Manesh R) ;pers:(Stone Gregg W.)"

Search: WFRF:(Patel Manesh R) > Stone Gregg W.

  • Result 1-5 of 5
Sort/group result
   
EnumerationReferenceCoverFind
1.
  • Douglas, Pamela S, et al. (author)
  • Comparison of an Initial Risk-Based Testing Strategy vs Usual Testing in Stable Symptomatic Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: The PRECISE Randomized Clinical Trial.
  • 2023
  • In: JAMA cardiology. - 2380-6591.
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Trials showing equivalent or better outcomes with initial evaluation using coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) compared with stress testing in patients with stable chest pain have informed guidelines but raise questions about overtesting and excess catheterization.To test a modified initial cCTA strategy designed to improve clinical efficiency vs usual testing (UT).This was a pragmatic randomized clinical trial enrolling participants from December 3, 2018, to May 18, 2021, with a median of 11.8 months of follow-up. Patients from 65 North American and European sites with stable symptoms of suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) and no prior testing were randomly assigned 1:1 to precision strategy (PS) or UT.PS incorporated the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for the Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) minimal risk score to quantitatively select minimal-risk participants for deferred testing, assigning all others to cCTA with selective CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR-CT). UT included site-selected stress testing or catheterization. Site clinicians determined subsequent care.Outcomes were clinical efficiency (invasive catheterization without obstructive CAD) and safety (death or nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI]) combined into a composite primary end point. Secondary end points included safety components of the primary outcome and medication use.A total of 2103 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.4 [11.5] years; 1056 male [50.2%]) were included in the study, and 422 [20.1%] were classified as minimal risk. The primary end point occurred in 44 of 1057 participants (4.2%) in the PS group and in 118 of 1046 participants (11.3%) in the UT group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25-0.50). Clinical efficiency was higher with PS, with lower rates of catheterization without obstructive disease (27 [2.6%]) vs UT participants (107 [10.2%]; HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16-0.36). The safety composite of death/MI was similar (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.73-3.15). Death occurred in 5 individuals (0.5%) in the PS group vs 7 (0.7%) in the UT group (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.23-2.23), and nonfatal MI occurred in 13 individuals (1.2%) in the PS group vs 5 (0.5%) in the UT group (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 0.96-7.36). Use of lipid-lowering (450 of 900 [50.0%] vs 365 of 873 [41.8%]) and antiplatelet (321 of 900 [35.7%] vs 237 of 873 [27.1%]) medications at 1 year was higher in the PS group compared with the UT group (both P < .001).An initial diagnostic approach to stable chest pain starting with quantitative risk stratification and deferred testing for minimal-risk patients and cCTA with selective FFR-CT in all others increased clinical efficiency relative to UT at 1 year. Additional randomized clinical trials are needed to verify these findings, including safety.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03702244.
  •  
2.
  • Udelson, James E, et al. (author)
  • Deferred Testing in Stable Outpatients With Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the PRECISE Randomized Clinical Trial.
  • 2023
  • In: JAMA cardiology. - 2380-6591.
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Guidelines recommend deferral of testing for symptomatic people with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) and low pretest probability. To our knowledge, no randomized trial has prospectively evaluated such a strategy.To assess process of care and health outcomes in people identified as minimal risk for CAD when testing is deferred.This randomized, pragmatic effectiveness trial included prespecified subgroup analysis of the PRECISE trial at 65 North American and European sites. Participants identified as minimal risk by the validated PROMISE minimal risk score (PMRS) were included.Randomization to a precision strategy using the PMRS to assign those with minimal risk to deferred testing and others to coronary computed tomography angiography with selective computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve, or to usual testing (stress testing or catheterization with PMRS masked). Randomization was stratified by PMRS risk.Composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or catheterization without obstructive CAD through 12 months.Among 2103 participants, 422 were identified as minimal risk (20%) and randomized to deferred testing (n = 214) or usual testing (n = 208). Mean age (SD) was 46 (8.6) years; 304 were women (72%). During follow-up, 138 of those randomized to deferred testing never had testing (64%), whereas 76 had a downstream test (36%) (at median [IQR] 48 [15-78] days) for worsening (30%), uncontrolled (10%), or new symptoms (6%), or changing clinician preference (19%) or participant preference (10%). Results were normal for 96% of these tests. The primary end point occurred in 2 deferred testing (0.9%) and 13 usual testing participants (6.3%) (hazard ratio, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.66; P = .01). No death or MI was observed in the deferred testing participants, while 1 noncardiovascular death and 1 MI occurred in the usual testing group. Two participants (0.9%) had catheterizations without obstructive CAD in the deferred testing group and 12 (5.8%) with usual testing (P = .02). At baseline, 70% of participants had frequent angina and there was similar reduction of frequent angina to less than 20% at 12 months in both groups.In symptomatic participants with suspected CAD, identification of minimal risk by the PMRS guided a strategy of initially deferred testing. The strategy was safe with no observed adverse outcome events, fewer catheterizations without obstructive CAD, and similar symptom relief compared with usual testing.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03702244.
  •  
3.
  • Figtree, Gemma A, et al. (author)
  • Clinical Outcomes in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation MI and No Standard Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors.
  • 2022
  • In: JACC. Cardiovascular interventions. - 1876-7605. ; 15:11, s. 1167-1175
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • The author recently reported ∼50% excess early mortality in patients with first-presentation ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs); the cause of this is not clear.The aim of this study was to examine differences in infarct characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with versus without SMuRFs (dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and smoking).Individual-level data were pooled from 10 randomized percutaneous intervention (PCI) trials in which infarct size was measured within 1 month by either cardiac magnetic resonance or technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography imaging. First-presentation STEMI was classified into 2 groups according to the presence or absence of at least 1 SMuRF.Among 2,862 patients, 524 (18.3%) were SMuRF-less. After adjusting for study effect, SMuRF-less patients had more frequent poor pre-PCI flow Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 0/1 compared with patients with at least 1 SMuRF (72.0% vs 64.1%; OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.08-1.70). There were no independent associations between the presence or absence of SMuRFs at baseline and infarct size (estimate = -0.35; 95% CI: -1.93 to 1.23), left ventricular ejection fraction (estimate = -0.06; 95% CI: -1.33 to 1.20), or mortality at 30 days (HR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.19-1.07) and 1 year (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.43-1.29).First-presentation STEMI patients with no identifiable baseline SMuRFs had a higher risk of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade 0/1 pre-PCI. However, after adjustment, there were no significant associations between SMuRF-less status and infarct size, left ventricle ejection fraction, or mortality.
  •  
4.
  • Mehdipoor, Ghazaleh, et al. (author)
  • Hypertension, Microvascular Obstruction and Infarct Size in Patients with STEMI Undergoing PCI: Pooled Analysis from 7 Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies.
  • 2024
  • In: American heart journal. - 1097-6744.
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Mortality after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is increased in patients with hypertension. The mechanisms underlying this association are uncertain. We sought to investigate whether patients with STEMI and prior hypertension have greater microvascular obstruction (MVO) and infarct size (IS) compared with those without hypertension.We pooled individual patient data from 7 randomized trials of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in whom cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed within 1 month after reperfusion. The associations between hypertension and MVO, IS, and mortality were assessed in multivariable adjusted models.Among 2174 patients (61.3±12.6 years, 76% male), 1196 (55.0%) had hypertension. Patients with hypertension were older, more frequently diabetic and had more extensive coronary artery disease than those without hypertension. MVO and IS measured as percent LV mass were not significantly different in patients with and without hypertension (adjusted differences 0.1, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.6, p=0.61 and -0.2, 95% CI -1.5 to 1.2, p=0.80, respectively). Hypertension was associated with a higher unadjusted risk of 1-year death (hazard ratio [HR] 2.28, 95% CI 1.44-3.60, p<0.001), but was not independently associated with higher mortality after multivariable adjustment (adjusted HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.60-1.79, p=0.90).In this large-scale individual patient data pooled analysis, hypertension was not associated with larger IS or MVO after primary PCI for STEMI.
  •  
5.
  • Redfors, Björn, et al. (author)
  • Ambient temperature and infarct size, microvascular obstruction, left ventricular function and clinical outcomes after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
  • 2022
  • In: Coronary artery disease. - 1473-5830. ; 33:2, s. 81-90
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Incidence and prognosis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) vary according to ambient temperature and season. We sought to assess whether season and temperature on the day of STEMI are associated with infarct size, microvascular obstruction (MVO), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and clinical outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Individual patient data from 1598 patients undergoing primary PCI in six randomized clinical trials were pooled. Infarct size was evaluated by cardiac magnetic resonance within 30days in all trials. Patients were categorized either by whether they presented on a day of temperature extremes (minimum temperature <0 °C or maximum temperature >25 °C) or according to season.A total of 558/1598 (34.9%) patients presented with STEMI on a day of temperature extremes, and 395 (24.7%), 374 (23.4%), 481 (30.1%) and 348 (21.8%) presented in the spring, summer, fall and winter. After multivariable adjustment, temperature extremes were independently associated with larger infarct size (adjusted difference 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.3-4.3; P<0.001) and smaller LVEF (adjusted difference -2.3%; 95% CI, -3.5 to -1.1; P=0.0002) but not with MVO (adjusted P=0.12). In contrast, infarct size, MVO and LVEF were unrelated to season (adjusted P=0.67; P=0.36 and P=0.95, respectively). Neither temperature extremes nor season were independently associated with 1-year risk of death or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted P=0.79 and P=0.90, respectively).STEMI presentation during temperature extremes was independently associated with larger infarct size and lower LVEF but not with MVO after primary PCI, whereas season was unrelated to infarct severity.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Result 1-5 of 5

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view