| 1. |
- d'Alessandro, Elisa, et al.
(author)
-
Thrombo-Inflammation in Cardiovascular Disease : An Expert Consensus Document from the Third Maastricht Consensus Conference on Thrombosis
- 2020
-
In: Thrombosis and Haemostasis. - : Georg Thieme Verlag KG. - 0340-6245 .- 2567-689X. ; 120:4, s. 538-564
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Thrombo-inflammation describes the complex interplay between blood coagulation and inflammation that plays a critical role in cardiovascular diseases. The third Maastricht Consensus Conference on Thrombosis assembled basic, translational, and clinical scientists to discuss the origin and potential consequences of thrombo-inflammation in the etiology, diagnostics, and management of patients with cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral artery disease. This article presents a state-of-the-art reflection of expert opinions and consensus recommendations regarding the following topics: (1) challenges of the endothelial cell barrier; (2) circulating cells and thrombo-inflammation, focused on platelets, neutrophils, and neutrophil extracellular traps; (3) procoagulant mechanisms; (4) arterial vascular changes in atherogenesis; attenuating atherosclerosis and ischemia/reperfusion injury; (5) management of patients with arterial vascular disease; and (6) pathogenesis of venous thrombosis and late consequences of venous thromboembolism.
|
|
| 2. |
- Fabritz, Larissa, et al.
(author)
-
Dynamic risk assessment to improve quality of care in patients with atrial fibrillation : the 7th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference
- 2021
-
In: Europace. - : Oxford University Press. - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 23:3, s. 329-344
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AimsThe risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and its complications continues to increase, despite good progress in preventing AF-related strokes.Methods and resultsThis article summarizes the outcomes of the 7th Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held in Lisbon in March 2019. Sixty-five international AF specialists met to present new data and find consensus on pressing issues in AF prevention, management and future research to improve care for patients with AF and prevent AF-related complications. This article is the main outcome of an interactive, iterative discussion between breakout specialist groups and the meeting plenary. AF patients have dynamic risk profiles requiring repeated assessment and risk-based therapy stratification to optimize quality of care. Interrogation of deeply phenotyped datasets with outcomes will lead to a better understanding of the cardiac and systemic effects of AF, interacting with comorbidities and predisposing factors, enabling stratified therapy. New proposals include an algorithm for the acute management of patients with AF and heart failure, a call for a refined, data-driven assessment of stroke risk, suggestions for anticoagulation use in special populations, and a call for rhythm control therapy selection based on risk of AF recurrence.ConclusionThe remaining morbidity and mortality in patients with AF needs better characterization. Likely drivers of the remaining AF-related problems are AF burden, potentially treatable by rhythm control therapy, and concomitant conditions, potentially treatable by treating these conditions. Identifying the drivers of AF-related complications holds promise for stratified therapy.
|
|
| 3. |
- Vaduganathan, Muthiah, et al.
(author)
-
Dronedarone for the treatment of atrial fibrillation with concomitant heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction : a post-hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial
- 2022
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 24:6, s. 1094-1101
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: Limited therapeutic options are available for the management of atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) with concomitant heart failure (HF) with preserved (HFpEF) and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Dronedarone reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with AF, but sparse data are available examining its role in patients with AF complicated by HFpEF and HFmrEF. Methods and results: ATHENA was an international, multicentre trial that randomized 4628 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and cardiovascular risk factors to dronedarone 400 mg twice daily versus placebo. We evaluated patients with (i) symptomatic HFpEF and HFmrEF (defined as left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] >40%, evidence of structural heart disease, and New York Heart Association class II/III or diuretic use), (ii) HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%), and (iii) those without HF. We assessed effects of dronedarone versus placebo on death or cardiovascular hospitalization (primary endpoint), other key efficacy endpoints, and safety. Overall, 534 (12%) had HFpEF or HFmrEF, 422 (9%) had HFrEF or left ventricular dysfunction, and 3672 (79%) did not have HF. Patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF had a mean age of 73 ± 9 years, 37% were women, and had a mean LVEF of 57 ± 9%. Over a mean follow-up of 21 ± 5 months, dronedarone consistently reduced risk of death or cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval 0.69–0.84) without heterogeneity based on HF status (pinteraction >0.10). This risk reduction in the primary endpoint was consistent across the range of LVEF (as a continuous function) in HF without heterogeneity (pinteraction = 0.71). Rates of death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and HF hospitalization each directionally favoured dronedarone versus placebo in HFpEF and HFmrEF, but these treatment effects were not statistically significant in this subgroup. Conclusions: Dronedarone is associated with reduced cardiovascular events in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and HF across the spectrum of LVEF, including among those with HFpEF and HFmrEF. These data support a rationale for a future dedicated and powered clinical trial to affirm the net clinical benefit of dronedarone in this population.
|
|
