| 11. |
- Bäck, Maria, et al.
(author)
-
The remote exercise SWEDEHEART study-Rationale and design of a multicenter registry-based cluster randomized crossover clinical trial (RRCT)
- 2023
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 262, s. 110-118
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Despite proven benefits of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (EBCR), few patients with myocardial infarction (MI) participate in and complete these programs.Study design and objectives: The Remote Exercise SWEDEHEART study is a large multicenter registry-based cluster randomized crossover clinical trial with a planned enrollment of 1500 patients with a recent MI. Patients at intervention centers will be offered supervised EBCR, either delivered remotely, center-based or as a combination of both modes, as self -preferred choice. At control centers, patients will be offered supervised center-based EBCR, only. The duration of each time period (intervention/control) for each center will be 15 months and then cross-over occurs. The primary aim is to evaluate if remotely delivered EBCR, offered as an alternative to center-based EBCR, can increase participation in EBCR sessions. The proportion completers in each group will be presented in a supportive responder analysis. The key secondary aim is to investigate if remote EBCR is as least as effective as center-based EBCR, in terms of physical fitness and patient-reported outcome measures. Follow-up of major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular-and all-cause mortality, recurrent hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, heart failure hospitalization, stroke, and coronary revascularization) will be performed at 1 and 3 years. Safety monitoring of serious adverse events will be registered, and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted to estimate the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) associated with the intervention compared with control.Conclusions: The cluster randomized crossover clinical trial Remote Exercise SWEDEHEART study is evaluating if par-ticipation in EBCR sessions can be increased, which may contribute to health benefits both on a group level and for individual patients including a more equal access to health care.Trial registration The study is registered atClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04260958) (Am Heart J 2023;262:110-118.)
|
|
| 12. |
- Christiansen, Evald H, et al.
(author)
-
Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI.
- 2017
-
In: The New England journal of medicine. - : Massachussetts Medical Society. - 1533-4406 .- 0028-4793. ; 376:19, s. 1813-1823
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is an index used to assess the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. The index has been tested against fractional flow reserve (FFR) in small trials, and the two measures have been found to have similar diagnostic accuracy. However, studies of clinical outcomes associated with the use of iFR are lacking. We aimed to evaluate whether iFR is noninferior to FFR with respect to the rate of subsequent major adverse cardiac events.We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2037 participants with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome who had an indication for physiologically guided assessment of coronary-artery stenosis were randomly assigned to undergo revascularization guided by either iFR or FFR. The primary end point was the rate of a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization within 12 months after the procedure.A primary end-point event occurred in 68 of 1012 patients (6.7%) in the iFR group and in 61 of 1007 (6.1%) in the FFR group (difference in event rates, 0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.5 to 2.8; P=0.007 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.58; P=0.53); the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the difference in event rates fell within the prespecified noninferiority margin of 3.2 percentage points. The results were similar among major subgroups. The rates of myocardial infarction, target-lesion revascularization, restenosis, and stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the two groups. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the FFR group than in the iFR group reported chest discomfort during the procedure.Among patients with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was noninferior to an FFR-guided revascularization strategy with respect to the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months. (Funded by Philips Volcano; iFR SWEDEHEART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02166736 .).
|
|
| 13. |
- Demidova, Marina M., et al.
(author)
-
Prognostic value of early sustained ventricular arrhythmias in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention : A substudy of VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
- 2023
-
In: Heart rhythm O2. - : Elsevier. - 2666-5018. ; 4:3, s. 200-206
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Prognostic assessment of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is based mainly on distinguishing between early (<48 hours) and late arrhythmias, and does not take into account its time distribution with regard to reperfusion, or type of arrhythmia.OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the prognostic value of early ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) in STEMI with regard to their type and timing.METHODS: The prespecified analysis of the multicenter prospective Bivalirudin versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarctionin Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based Care in Heart Disease evaluated according to Recommended Therapies Registry Trial included 2886 STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). VA episodes were characterized regarding their type and timing. Survival status at 180 days was assessed through the population registry.RESULTS: Nonmonomorphic VT or VF was observed in 97 (3.4%) and monomorphic VT in 16 (0.5%) patients. Only 3 (2.7%) early VA episodes occurred after 24 hours from symptom onset. VA was associated with higher risk of death (hazard ratio 3.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01-6.42) after adjustment for age, sex, and STEMI localization. VA after PCI was associated with an increased mortality compared with VA before PCI (hazard ratio 6.68; 95% CI 2.90-15.41). Early VA was associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 7.39; 95% CI 3.68-14.83) but not with long-term prognosis in patients discharged alive. The type of VA was not associated with mortality.CONCLUSION: VA after PCI was associated with an increased mortality compared with VA before PCI. Long-term prognosis did not differ between patients with monomorphic VT and nonmonomorphic VT or VF, but events were few. VA incidence during 24 to 48 hours of STEMI is negligibly low, thus precluding assessment of its prognostic importance.
|
|
| 14. |
- Erlinge, D., et al.
(author)
-
Bivalirudin versus Heparin Monotherapy in Myocardial Infarction
- 2017
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 377:12, s. 1132-1142
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background The comparative efficacy of various anticoagulation strategies has not been clearly established in patients with acute myocardial infarction who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) according to current practice, which includes the use of radial-artery access for PCI and administration of potent P2Y12 inhibitors without the planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Methods In this multicenter, randomized, registry-based, open-label clinical trial, we enrolled patients with either ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) who were undergoing PCI and receiving treatment with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor (ticagrelor, prasugrel, or cangrelor) without the planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. The patients were randomly assigned to receive bivalirudin or heparin during PCI, which was performed predominantly with the use of radial-artery access. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or major bleeding during 180 days of follow-up. Results A total of 6006 patients (3005 with STEMI and 3001 with NSTEMI) were enrolled in the trial. At 180 days, a primary end-point event had occurred in 12.3% of the patients (369 of 3004) in the bivalirudin group and in 12.8% (383 of 3002) in the heparin group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.10; P=0.54). The results were consistent between patients with STEMI and those with NSTEMI and across other major subgroups. Myocardial infarction occurred in 2.0% of the patients in the bivalirudin group and in 2.4% in the heparin group (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.19; P=0.33), major bleeding in 8.6% and 8.6%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.19; P=0.98), definite stent thrombosis in 0.4% and 0.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.10; P=0.09), and death in 2.9% and 2.8%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.41; P=0.76). Conclusions Among patients undergoing PCI for myocardial infarction, the rate of the composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or major bleeding was not lower among those who received bivalirudin than among those who received heparin monotherapy. (Funded by the Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation and others; VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART ClinicalTrialsRegister.eu number, 2012-005260-10 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02311231 .).
|
|
| 15. |
- Erlinge, David, et al.
(author)
-
Bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
- 2019
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Sage Publications. - 2048-8726 .- 2048-8734. ; 8:6, s. 492-501
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The optimal anti-coagulation strategy for patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention is unclear in contemporary clinical practice of radial access and potent P2Y12-inhibitors. The aim of this study was to investigate whether bivalirudin was superior to heparin monotherapy in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction without routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use.METHODS: In a large pre-specified subgroup of the multicentre, prospective, randomised, registry-based, open-label clinical VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial we randomised patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel, to bivalirudin or heparin monotherapy with no planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was the rate of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding within 180 days.RESULTS: A total of 3001 patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, were enrolled. The primary endpoint occurred in 12.1% (182 of 1503) and 12.5% (187 of 1498) of patients in the bivalirudin and heparin groups, respectively (hazard ratio of bivalirudin compared to heparin treatment 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.18, p=0.69). The results were consistent in all major subgroups. All-cause death occurred in 2.0% versus 1.7% (hazard ratio 1.15, 0.68-1.94, p=0.61), myocardial infarction in 2.3% versus 2.5% (hazard ratio 0.91, 0.58-1.45, p=0.70), major bleeding in 8.9% versus 9.1% (hazard ratio 0.97, 0.77-1.24, p=0.82) and definite stent thrombosis in 0.3% versus 0.2% (hazard ratio 1.33, 0.30-5.93, p=0.82).CONCLUSION: Bivalirudin as compared to heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction did not reduce the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or major bleeding in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients receiving current recommended treatments with modern P2Y12-inhibitors and predominantly radial access.
|
|
| 16. |
- Fröbert, Ole, 1964-, et al.
(author)
-
Design and rationale for the Influenza vaccination After Myocardial Infarction (IAMI) trial. A registry-based randomized clinical trial
- 2017
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : MOSBY-ELSEVIER. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 189, s. 94-102
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Registry studies and case-control studies have demonstrated that the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is increased following influenza infection. Small randomized trials, underpowered for clinical end points, indicate that future cardiovascular events can be reduced following influenza vaccination in patients with established cardiovascular disease. Influenza vaccination is recommended by international guidelines for patients with cardiovascular disease, but uptake is varying and vaccination is rarely prioritized during hospitalization for AMI.Methods/design: The Influenza vaccination After Myocardial Infarction (IAMI) trial is a double-blind, multicenter, prospective, registry-based, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. A total of 4,400 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI undergoing coronary angiography will randomly be assigned either to in-hospital influenza vaccination or to placebo. Baseline information is collected from national heart disease registries, and follow-up will be performed using both registries and a structured telephone interview. The primary end point is a composite of time to all cause death, a new AMI, or stent thrombosis at 1 year.Implications: The IAMI trial is the largest randomized trial to date to evaluate the effect of in-hospital influenza vaccination on death and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with STEMI or non-STEMI. The trial is expected to provide highly relevant clinical data on the efficacy of influenza vaccine as secondary prevention after AMI.
|
|
| 17. |
- Götberg, Matthias, et al.
(author)
-
5-Year Outcomes of PCI Guided by Measurement of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve
- 2022
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 79:10, s. 965-974
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is a coronary physiology index used to assess the severity of coronary artery stenosis to guide revascularization. iFR has previously demonstrated noninferior short-term outcome compared to fractional flow reserve (FFR), but data on longer-term outcome have been lacking.OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prespecified 5-year follow-up of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization of the iFR-SWEDEHEART trial comparing iFR vs FFR in patients with chronic and acute coronary syndromes.METHODS: iFR-SWEDEHEART was a multicenter, controlled, open-label, registry-based randomized clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2,037 patients were randomized to undergo revascularization guided by iFR or FFR.RESULTS: No patients were lost to follow-up. At 5 years, the rate of the primary composite endpoint was 21.5% in the iFR group and 19.9% in the FFR group (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.90-1.33). The rates of all-cause death (9.4% vs 7.9%; HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.89-1.62), nonfatal myocardial infarction (5.7% vs 5.8%; HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.70-1.44), and unplanned revascularization (11.6% vs 11.3%; HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.79-1.32) were also not different between the 2 groups. The outcomes were consistent across prespecified subgroups.CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic or acute coronary syndromes, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was associated with no difference in the 5-year composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned revascularization compared with an FFR-guided revascularization strategy. (Evaluation of iFR vs FFR in Stable Angina or Acute Coronary Syndrome [iFR SWEDEHEART]; NCT02166736)
|
|
| 18. |
- Hofmann, Robin, et al.
(author)
-
Avoiding Routine Oxygen Therapy in Patients With Myocardial Infarction Saves Significant Expenditure for the Health Care System—Insights From the Randomized DETO2X-AMI Trial
- 2022
-
In: Frontiers In Public Health. - Lausanne, Switzerland : Frontiers Media SA. - 2296-2565. ; 9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) occurs frequently and requires considerable health care resources. It is important to ensure that the treatments which are provided are both clinically effective and economically justifiable. Based on recent new evidence, routine oxygen therapy is no longer recommended in MI patients without hypoxemia. By using data from a nationwide randomized clinical trial, we estimated oxygen therapy related cost savings in this important clinical setting. Methods: The DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial randomized 6,629 patients from 35 hospitals across Sweden to oxygen at 6 L/min for 6–12 h or ambient air. Costs for drug and medical supplies, and labor were calculated per patient, for the whole study population, and for the total annual care episodes for MI in Sweden (N = 16,100) with 10 million inhabitants. Results: Per patient, costs were estimated to 36 USD, summing up to a total cost of 119,832 USD for the whole study population allocated to oxygen treatment. Applied to the annual care episodes for MI in Sweden, costs sum up to between 514,060 and 604,777 USD. In the trial, 62 (2%) patients assigned to oxygen and 254 (8%) patients assigned to ambient air developed hypoxemia. A threshold analysis suggested that up to a cut-off of 624 USD spent for hypoxemia treatment related costs per patient, avoiding routine oxygen therapy remains cost saving. Conclusions: Avoiding routine oxygen therapy in patients with suspected or confirmed MI without hypoxemia at baseline saves significant expenditure for the health care system both with regards to medical and human resources. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01787110. Copyright © 2022 Hofmann, Abebe, Herlitz, James, Erlinge, Alfredsson, Jernberg, Kellerth, Ravn-Fischer, Lindahl, Langenskiöld and DETO2X-SWEDEHEART Investigators.
|
|
| 19. |
- Hofmann, Robin, et al.
(author)
-
Oxygen therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
- 2018
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:29, s. 2730-2739
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: To determine whether supplemental oxygen in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) impacts on procedure-related and clinical outcomes.Methods and results: The DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial randomized patients with suspected myocardial infarction (MI) to receive oxygen at 6 L/min for 6-12 h or ambient air. In this pre-specified analysis, we included only STEMI patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In total, 2807 patients were included, 1361 assigned to receive oxygen, and 1446 assigned to ambient air. The pre-specified primary composite endpoint of all-cause death, rehospitalization with MI, cardiogenic shock, or stent thrombosis at 1 year occurred in 6.3% (86 of 1361) of patients allocated to oxygen compared to 7.5% (108 of 1446) allocated to ambient air [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.64-1.13; P = 0.27]. There was no difference in the rate of death from any cause (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.61-1.22; P = 0.41), rate of rehospitalization for MI (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.57-1.48; P = 0.73), rehospitalization for cardiogenic shock (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.21-5.22; P = 0.95), or stent thrombosis (HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.46-3.51; P = 0.64). The primary composite endpoint was consistent across all subgroups, as well as at different time points, such as during hospital stay, at 30 days and the total duration of follow-up up to 1356 days.Conclusions: Routine use of supplemental oxygen in normoxemic patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI did not significantly affect 1-year all-cause death, rehospitalization with MI, cardiogenic shock, or stent thrombosis.
|
|
| 20. |
- Hofmann, R., et al.
(author)
-
Routine Oxygen Therapy Does Not Improve Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction—Insights From the Randomized DETO2X-AMI Trial
- 2021
-
In: Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. - : Frontiers Media S.A.. - 2297-055X. ; 8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: After decades of ubiquitous oxygen therapy in all patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), recent guidelines are more restrictive based on lack of efficacy in contemporary trials evaluating hard clinical outcomes in patients without hypoxemia at baseline. However, no evidence regarding treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) exists. In this study, we investigated the impact of routine oxygen supplementation on HRQoL 6–8 weeks after hospitalization with acute MI. Secondary objectives included analyses of MI subtypes, further adjustment for infarct size, and oxygen saturation at baseline and 1-year follow-up.Methods: In the DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial, 6,629 normoxemic patients with suspected MI were randomized to oxygen at 6 L/min for 6–12 h or ambient air. In this prespecified analysis, patients younger than 75 years of age with confirmed MI who had available HRQoL data by European Quality of Life Five Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) in the national registry were included. Primary endpoint was the EQ-5D index assessed by multivariate linear regression at 6–10 weeks after MI occurrence.Results: A total of 3,086 patients (median age 64, 22% female) were eligible, 1,518 allocated to oxygen and 1,568 to ambient air. We found no statistically significant effect of oxygen therapy on EQ-5D index (−0.01; 95% CI: −0.03–0.01; p = 0.23) or EQ-VAS score (−0.57; 95% CI: −1.88–0.75; p = 0.40) compared to ambient air after 6–10 weeks. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed between the treatment groups in EQ-5D dimensions. Results remained consistent across MI subtypes and at 1-year follow-up, including further adjustment for infarct size or oxygen saturation at baseline.Conclusions: Routine oxygen therapy provided to normoxemic patients with acute MI did not improve HRQoL up to 1 year after MI occurrence. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01787110.
|
|
