| 1. |
- Andell, Pontus, et al.
(författare)
-
Oxygen therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction and concurrent normoxemic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease : a prespecified subgroup analysis from the DETO2X-AMI trial.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2048-8726 .- 2048-8734. ; 9:8, s. 984-992
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial did not find any benefit of oxygen therapy compared to ambient air in normoxemic patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may both benefit and be harmed by supplemental oxygen. Thus we evaluated the effect of routine oxygen therapy compared to ambient air in normoxemic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction.METHODS AND RESULTS: =0.77]); there were no significant treatment-by-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease interactions.CONCLUSIONS: Although chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients had twice the mortality rate compared to non-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, this prespecified subgroup analysis from the DETO2X-AMI trial on oxygen therapy versus ambient air in normoxemic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction revealed no evidence for benefit of routine oxygen therapy consistent with the main trial's findings.CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02290080.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mokhtari, Arash, et al.
(författare)
-
Oxygen therapy in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction based on the culprit vessel: results from the randomized controlled SOCCER trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMC Emergency Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-227X. ; 20, s. 1-10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Oxygen (O2) treatment has been a cornerstone in the treatment of patients with myocardial infarction. Recent studies, however, state that supplemental O2 therapy may have no effect or harmful effects in these patients. The aim of this study was thus to evaluate the effect of O2 therapy in patients with ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) based on the culprit vessel; Left Anterior Descending Artery (LAD) or Non-LAD.Methods: This was a two-center, investigator-initiated, single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial at the Skåne university hospital, Sweden. A simple computer-generated randomization was used. Patients were eitherrandomized to standard care with O2 therapy (10 l/min) or air until the end of the primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The patients underwent a Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging (CMRI) days 2–6. The main outcome measures were Myocardium at Risk (MaR), Infarct Size (IS) and Myocardial Salvage Index (MSI) as measured by CMRI, and median high-sensitive troponin T (hs-cTnT).Results: A total of 229 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 160 of them were randomized to the oxygen or air arm. Because of primarily technical problems with the CMRI, 95 patients were included in the final analyses; 46 inthe oxygen arm and 49 in the air arm. There were no significant differences between patients with LAD and NonLAD as culprit vessel with regard to their allocation (oxygen or air) with regards to MSI, MaR, IS and hs-cTnT.Conclusion: The results indicate that the location of the culprit vessel has probably no effect on the role of supplemental oxygen therapy in STEMI patients.
|
|
| 3. |
- Olsson, Anneli, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient experience of the informed consent process during acute myocardial infarction : a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Trials. - : BMC. - 1745-6215. ; 21:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Background: The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied.Methods: A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time?Results: Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance.Conclusion: It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment.
|
|
