| 1. |
- Lalani, Tahaniyat, et al.
(author)
-
Propionibacterium endocarditis: a case series from the International Collaboration on Endocarditis Merged Database and Prospective Cohort Study.
- 2007
-
In: Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0036-5548 .- 1651-1980. ; 39:10, s. 840-8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Propionibacterium species are occasionally associated with serious systemic infections such as infective endocarditis. In this study, we examined the clinical features, complications and outcome of 15 patients with Propionibacterium endocarditis using the International Collaboration on Endocarditis Merged Database (ICE-MD) and Prospective Cohort Study (ICE-PCS), and compared the results to 28 cases previously reported in the literature. In the ICE database, 11 of 15 patients were male with a mean age of 52 y. Prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred in 13 of 15 cases and 3 patients had a history of congenital heart disease. Clinical findings included valvular vegetations (9 patients), cardiac abscesses (3 patients), congestive heart failure (2 patients), and central nervous system emboli (2 patients). Most patients were treated with beta-lactam antibiotics alone or in combination for 4 to 6 weeks. 10 of the 15 patients underwent valve replacement surgery and 2 patients died. Similar findings were noted on review of the literature. The results of this paper suggest that risk factors for Propionibacterium endocarditis include male gender, presence of prosthetic valves and congenital heart disease. The clinical course is characterized by complications such as valvular dehiscence, cardiac abscesses and congestive heart failure. Treatment may require a combination of medical and surgical therapy.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mark, Daniel B., et al.
(author)
-
Comprehensive Quality-of-Life Outcomes With Invasive Versus Conservative Management of Chronic Coronary Disease in ISCHEMIA
- 2022
-
In: Circulation. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 145:17, s. 1294-1307
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) compared an initial invasive treatment strategy (INV) with an initial conservative strategy in 5179 participants with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia. The ISCHEMIA research program included a comprehensive quality-of-life (QOL) substudy.METHODS: In 1819 participants (907 INV, 912 conservative strategy), we collected a battery of disease-specific and generic QOL instruments by structured interviews at baseline; at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months postrandomization; and at study closeout. Assessments included angina-related QOL (19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire), generic health status (EQ-5D), depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-8), and, for North American patients, cardiac functional status (Duke Activity Status Index).RESULTS: Median age was 67 years, 19.2% were female, and 15.9% were non-White. The estimated mean difference for the 19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary score favored INV (1.4 points [95% CI, 0.2-2.5] over all follow-up). No differences were observed in patients with rare/absent baseline angina (SAQ Angina Frequency score >80). Among patients with more frequent angina at baseline (SAQ Angina Frequency score <80, 744 patients, 41%), those randomly assigned to INV had a mean 3.7-point higher 19-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary score than conservative strategy (95% CI, 1.6-5.8) with consistent effects across SAQ subscales: Physical Limitations 3.2 points (95% CI, 0.2-6.1), Angina Frequency 3.2 points (95% CI, 1.2-5.1), Quality of Life/Health Perceptions 5.3 points (95% CI, 2.8-7.8). For the Duke Activity Status Index, no difference was estimated overall by treatment, but in patients with baseline SAQ Angina Frequency scores <80, Duke Activity Status Index scores were higher for INV (3.2 points [95% CI, 0.6-5.7]), whereas patients with rare/absent baseline angina showed no treatment-related differences. Moderate to severe depression was infrequent at randomization (11.5%-12.8%) and was unaffected by treatment assignment.CONCLUSIONS: In the ISCHEMIA comprehensive QOL substudy, patients with more frequent baseline angina reported greater improvements in the symptom, physical functioning, and psychological well-being dimensions of QOL when treated with an invasive strategy, whereas patients who had rare/absent angina at baseline reported no consistent treatment-related QOL differences.
|
|
| 3. |
- Spertus, John A, et al.
(author)
-
Health-Status Outcomes with Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary Disease.
- 2020
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 382:15, s. 1408-1419
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients.METHODS: We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency.RESULTS: At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina).CONCLUSIONS: In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).
|
|
