11. |
- Graham, Ian, et al.
(author)
-
European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: full text. Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts).
- 2007
-
In: European journal of cardiovascular prevention and rehabilitation : official journal of the European Society of Cardiology, Working Groups on Epidemiology & Prevention and Cardiac Rehabilitation and Exercise Physiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1741-8267. ; 14 Suppl 2
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Other experts who contributed to parts of the guidelines: Edmond Walma, Tony Fitzgerald, Marie Therese Cooney, Alexandra Dudina European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG): Alec Vahanian (Chairperson), John Camm, Raffaele De Caterina, Veronica Dean, Kenneth Dickstein, Christian Funck-Brentano, Gerasimos Filippatos, Irene Hellemans, Steen Dalby Kristensen, Keith McGregor, Udo Sechtem, Sigmund Silber, Michal Tendera, Petr Widimsky, Jose Luis Zamorano Document reviewers: Irene Hellemans (CPG Review Co-ordinator), Attila Altiner, Enzo Bonora, Paul N. Durrington, Robert Fagard, Simona Giampaoli, Harry Hemingway, Jan Hakansson, Sverre Erik Kjeldsen, Mogens Lytken Larsen, Giuseppe Mancia, Athanasios J. Manolis, Kristina Orth-Gomer, Terje Pedersen, Mike Rayner, Lars Ryden, Mario Sammut, Neil Schneiderman, Anton F. Stalenhoef, Lale Tokgözoglu, Olov Wiklund, Antonis Zampelas
|
|
12. |
|
|
13. |
- Huber, Kurt, et al.
(author)
-
Antiplatelet and anticoagulation agents in acute coronary syndromes : What is the current status and what does the future hold?
- 2014
-
In: American Heart Journal. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-8703 .- 1097-6744. ; 168:5, s. 611-621
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Mortality and morbidity in acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), caused principally by plaque erosion or rupture leading to thrombus formation and myocardial ischemia, have been reduced by a combination of antithrombotic agents (antiplatelet drugs and anticoagulants) and early revascularization. Aspirin is the foundation antiplatelet agent. New P2Y(12) receptor inhibitors (prasugrel and ticagrelor) have clear benefits compared with clopidogrel for dual antiplatelet therapy, and cangrelor or vorapaxar, a thrombin receptor inhibitor, may be of value in specific settings. Anticoagulation uses 1 of 4 choices: bivalirudin, unfractionated heparin, enoxaparin, and fondaparinux. Moreover, some patients (such as those who have chronic atrial fibrillation) require triple therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel, plus an anticoagulant, frequently a vitamin K antagonist. New oral anticoagulants have been shown to be at least as effective as vitamin K antagonists in atrial fibrillation and led to fewer bleeding complications. Finally, the combination of aspirin, clopidogrel, and low-dose rivaroxaban has recently been approved by the European Medicines Agency (but not the Food and Drug Administration) for secondary prevention after ACS. Several strategies have been developed to balance the potential benefit of antithrombotic therapy against the risk of bleeding complications, for example, radial access in coronary angiography or restricted use of combination therapy, and others are under investigation, such as discontinuation of aspirin. This overview summarizes the current status of antithrombotic therapy in ACS and describes strategies currently explored to optimize its benefit/risk ratio.
|
|
14. |
|
|
15. |
|
|
16. |
|
|
17. |
- Sejr-Hansen, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for Immediate Assessment of Non-Culprit Lesions in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction An iSTEMI Substudy
- 2018
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 72:13, s. B248-B249
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is an angiography-based approach for in-procedure functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of QFR with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in non-culprit lesions (NCLs) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and with staged fractional flow reserve (FFR) as reference standard.METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. All NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 19 days) follow-up. QFR (Medis Medical Imaging bv., The Netherlands) was computed for all analyzable NCLs in a core lab by an investigator blinded to iFR and FFR results. Diagnostic cut-off values were 0.80 for QFR, 0.89 for iFR, and 0.80 for FFR.RESULTS: A total of 156 NCLs in 120 patients were included in the iSTEMI study. Paired iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCls in 112 patients. Of these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71 %) lesions assessed in the acute setting. Mean acute QFR was 0.800.13, acute iFR was 0.860.12, and staged FFR was 0.800.11. With staged FFR as reference standard, diagnostic accuracy was 84% (95%CI: 76-90) for acute QFR and 73% (95%CI: 66-83) for acute iFR (p¼0.09), area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was 0.89 (95%CI: 0.82-0.95) vs. 0.77 (95%CI: 0.68-0.87) (p¼0.02), sensitivity was 83% (95%CI: 69-92) vs. 85% (95%CI: 73-92) (p¼0.79), specificity was 84% (95%CI: 72-92) vs. 64% (95%CI: 53-75) (p¼0.11), positive predictive value was 81% (95%CI: 57-82) vs. 70% (95%CI: 57-82)(p¼0.06), and negative predictive value was 86% (95%CI: 76-95) vs. 84% (95%CI: 69-91)(p¼0.37), for acute QFR and acute iFR, respectively.CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of acute QFR in post hocevaluation of NCLs in STEMI patients was at least similar to acuteassessment by iFR with staged procedure FFR as reference. QFR couldprovide an easy, safe and cost-effective solution to evaluate NCLs inthe acute phase, thus potentially reducing the number of unnecessaryfollow-up procedures.CATEGORIES IMAGING: Physiologic Lesion Assessment.
|
|
18. |
- Sejr-Hansen, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Quantitative flow ratio for immediate assessment of nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction—An iSTEMI substudy
- 2019
-
In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. - : Wiley. - 1522-1946 .- 1522-726X. ; 94:5, s. 686-692
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) assessment of nonculprit lesions (NCLs) based on acute setting angiograms obtained in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with QFR, fractional flow reserve (FFR), and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in the staged setting as reference. Background: QFR is an angiography-based approach for the functional evaluation of coronary artery lesions. Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of the iSTEMI study. NCLs were assessed with iFR in the acute setting and with iFR and FFR at staged (median 13 days) follow-up. Acute and staged QFR values were computed in a core laboratory based on the coronary angiography recordings. Diagnostic cut-off values were ≤0.80 for QFR and FFR, and ≤0.89 for iFR. Results: Staged iFR and FFR data were available for 146 NCLs in 112 patients in the iSTEMI study. Among these, QFR analysis was feasible in 103 (71%) lesions assessed in the acute setting with a mean QFR value of 0.82 (IQR: 0.73–0.91). Staged QFR, FFR, and iFR were 0.80 (IQR: 0.70–0.90), 0.81 (IQR: 0.71–0.88), and 0.91 (IQR: 0.87–0.96), respectively. Classification agreement of acute and staged QFR was 93% (95%Cl: 87–99). The classification agreement of acute QFR was 84% (95%CI: 76–90) using staged FFR as reference and 74% (95%CI: 65–83) using staged iFR as reference. Conclusions: Acute QFR showed a very good diagnostic performance with staged QFR as reference, a good diagnostic performance with staged FFR as reference, and a moderate diagnostic performance with staged iFR as reference.
|
|
19. |
- Thim, Troels, et al.
(author)
-
Agreement between iFR and FFR in staged follow-up evaluation of non-culprit stenoses after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (iSTEMI substudy)
- 2017
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 70:18, s. B91-B91
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Classification agreement between instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) is approximately 80% in stable patients. It was recently shown that FFR guidance, as compared to iFR guidance, was associated with a higher risk of subsequent revascularization among patients with non- ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The classification agreement, and the impact of time interval, between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been described.METHODS: The iSTEMI study assessed agreement between iFR across non-culprit stenoses at the index procedure in patients with STEMI versus iFR and FFR at a follow-up angiography. The interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation was at the discretion of the treating physicians. In this substudy, classification agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR was evaluated within groups defined according to follow-up time point after STEMI, i.e., <5days, 5-15days, and16 days. iFR<0.90 and FFR0.80 were considered hemodynamically significant.RESULTS: Among 120 patients with 157 non-culprit stenoses, follow-up iFR and FFR was available in 112 patients with 146 non-culprit stenoses. Median follow-up interval was 16 days (IQR 5-32 days). The overall classification agreement was 84%. With follow-up<5days after STEMI, there was classification agreement between iFR and FFR was in 27 of 35 (77%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 5-15 after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 33 of 38 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. With follow-up 16 days after STEMI, there was classification agreement in 63 of 73 (86%) non-culprit stenoses. The observed differences in these proportions over time after STEMI were not statistically significant (<5versus5days, p¼0.19).CONCLUSION: Overall, classification agreement between iFR and FFR in the assessment of non-culprit lesions after STEMI was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between follow-up iFR and follow-up FFR, although the observed differences were not statistically significant.
|
|
20. |
- Thim, Troels, et al.
(author)
-
Agreement between nonculprit stenosis follow-up iFR and FFR after STEMI (iSTEMI substudy)
- 2020
-
In: BMC Research Notes. - : BioMed Central. - 1756-0500. ; 13:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To evaluate agreement between instantaneous wave free ratio (iFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) for the functional assessment of nonculprit coronary stenoses at staged follow-up after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).RESULTS: We measured iFR and FFR at staged follow-up in 112 STEMI patients with 146 nonculprit stenoses. Median interval between STEMI and follow-up was 16 (interquartile range 5-32) days. Agreement between iFR and FFR was 77% < 5 days after STEMI and 86% after ≥ 5 days (p = 0.19). Among cases with disagreement, the proportion of cases with hemodynamically significant iFR and non-significant FFR were different when assessed < 5 days (5 in 8, 63%) versus ≥ 5 days (3 in 15, 20%) after STEMI (p = 0.04). Overall classification agreement between iFR and FFR was comparable to that observed in stable patients. Time interval between STEMI and follow-up evaluation may impact agreement between iFR and FFR.
|
|