The clinical and economic importance of heart failure is widely recognized. The incidence of heart failure is on the increase, particularly with the aging of the population around the world. It is time for a paradigm shift in heart failure management. Alternative non-pharmacological strategies to remodel the failing ventricle will shape a major portion of heart failure therapy in the decade ahead. Exposure to heat is widely used as a traditional therapy in many cultures. In this paper, we will review recent data that suggest thermal therapy may be helpful as an adjunctive non-pharmacological treatment for heart failure. J Teh Univ Heart Ctr 3 (2009) 149-158
This study aimed to assess the associations between corrected thrombolysis in myocardial infarction frame count (CTFC) of the infarct-related artery (IRA) and ejection fraction (EF) after three-six months in patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).CTFC was determined by a digital system for 78 patients. EF was measured through Simpson's method upon discharge and three-six months later. The subjects were divided into two groups of CTFC ≤ 20 (n = 54) and CTFC > 20 (n = 24). Association between CTFC and EF were then specified.CTFC ≤ 20 and CTFC > 20 were present in 69.2% and 30.8% of the patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding baseline characteristics. EF at the time of discharge was 42.1% ± 10.2% and 43.5% ± 11.4% in groups with CTFC ≤ 20 and > 20, respectively. There was no significant association between EF at discharge and CTFC (P = 0.611). After three months, EF changed to 49.6% ± 8.7% and 41.6 ± 12.4% in the groups with CTFC ≤ 20 and CTFC > 20, respectively. Three months after PPCI, EF and CTFC had a significant relation (P = 0.007). Cumulative number and percentage of shock and death were 3 (3.8%) and 2 (2.6%), respectively.Lower CTFC of the infarct-related artery in patients undergoing PPCI for STEMI was associated with higher left ventricular ejection fraction after three months.
The use of thrombolytic agents in the treatment of hemodynamically stable patients with acute submassive pulmonary embolism (PTE) remains controversial. We, therefore, conducted this study to compare the effect of thrombolytic plus anticoagulation versus anticoagulation alone on early death and adverse outcome following submassive PTE.We conducted a study of patients with acute pulmonary embolism and pulmonary hypertension or right ventricular dilatation/dysfunction but without arterial hypotension or shock. The patients were randomly assigned in a single-blind fashion to receive an anticoagulant [Enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice a day)] plus a thrombolytic [Alteplase (100 mg) or Streptokinase (1500000 u/2 hours)] or an anticoagulant [Enoxaparin (1 mg/kg twice a day)] alone. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death or clinical deterioration requiring an escalation of treatment. The secondary endpoints of the study were major bleeding, pulmonary hypertension, right ventricular dilatation at the end of the first week, and exertional dyspnea at the end of the first month.Of 50 patients enrolled, 25 patients were randomly assigned to receive an anticoagulant plus a thrombolytic and the other 25 patients were given an anticoagulant alone. The incidence of the primary endpoints was significantly higher in the anticoagulant-alone group than in the thrombolytic-plus-anticoagulant group (p value = 0.022). At the time of discharge, pulmonary artery pressure was significantly higher in the anticoagulant-alone group than in the thrombolytic-plus-anticoagulant group (p value = 0.018); however, reduction in the right ventricular size or normalization of the right ventricle showed non-significant differences between the two groups. There was no significant difference regarding the New York Heat Association (NYHA) functional class between the two groups at the end of the first month (p value = 0.213). No fatal bleeding or cerebral bleeding occurred in the patients receiving an anticoagulant plus a thrombolytic.When given in conjunction with anticoagulants, thrombolytics may improve the clinical course of stable patients who have acute submassive pulmonary embolism and prevent clinical deterioration.
To describe the levels of troponin I in COVID-19 patients and its role in the prediction of their in-hospital mortality as a cardiac biomarker.The current retrospective cohort study was performed on the clinical records of 649 COVID-19-related hospitalized cases with at leat one positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test in Tehran, Iran from February 2020 to early June 2020. The on admission troponin I level divided into two groups of ≤0.03ng/mL (normal) and >0.03ng/mL (abnormal). The adjusted COX-regression model was used to determine the relationship between the studied variables and patient's in-hospital mortality.In this study, the median age of subjects was 65 years (54.8% men) and 29.53% of them had abnormal troponin I levels. Besides, the in-hospital mortality rate among patients with abnormal troponin I levels was found to be 51.56%; whereas, patients with normal levels exhibited 18.82% mortality. Also, the multivariable analysis indicated that the risk of death among hospitalized COVID-19 patients displaying abnormal troponin I levels was 67% higher than those with normal troponin I levels (Hazard ratio=1.67, 95% confidence interval=1.08-2.56, p=0.019).It seems that troponin I is one of the important factors related to in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients. Next, due to the high prevalence of cardiac complications in these patients, it is highly suggested to monitor and control cardiac biomarkers along with other clinical factors upon the patient's arrival at the hospital.
Despite established effects of atorvastatin on level of serum lipid profile in patients with different underlying clinical conditions, the effects of this drug on other serum biomarkers remain uncertain. We examined the effects of atorvastatin therapy on lipid profile, glycemic control, and liver enzymes in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular accident without any history or clinical evidences of diabetes, heart failure, renal failure, or hepatic disease.
Objectives: During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the incidence of cardiovascular diseases increased. In this context, diagnosing ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in COVID-19 cases has become complex and challenging. Objectives: This study explored the characteristics and compared clinical outcomes between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients with STEMI. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted on adult patients admitted with the diagnosis of STEMI in the first 6 months of the pandemic. Patients were evaluated for COVID-19 diagnosis and divided into two groups: COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative. Then, they were monitored during hospitalization and 6 months after discharge. Results: Of 131 patients admitted with STEMI, 22.13% had COVID-19 infection. Most patients were men, and the COVID-19-positive patients were older than non-infected patients (63.97±12.54 vs 58.19±10.97 years; P=0.039). The COVID-19-infected patients had a higher prevalence of diabetes (P=0.003) and heart failure (P=0.008). They had higher levels of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (P=0.003) and neutrophil count (P=0.018), whereas lymphocyte count declined considerably in these patients (P=0.012). In addition, hospital length of stay was higher in the infected patients (6.64±4.30 vs 4.93±3.59 days; P=0.023). During the study period, the overall mortality rate in our setting was 8.82% and 17.24% in COVID-19-negative and -positive patients, respectively. However, this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.195). Discussion: Although the current study employed a small sample, the findings suggest notable differences between the STEMI patients with and without COVID-19 infection regarding some parameters, especially underlying comorbidities. However, the difference in mortality was not significant.
Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (primary PCI) is the method of choice in establishing reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of primary PCI in a university medical center in Iran with a view to promoting it as a first-line therapy in patients with AMI, especially in centers with established catheterization labs across the country. Methods: All cases of AMI admitted between September 2001 and September 2005 underwent primary PCI. The achieved thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow was recorded, and the patients were followed during the hospital admission for major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results: A total of 180 patients, consisting of 36 females and 144 males, with a mean age of 56±2.1 years were included in the study. The target vessel was the left anterior descending artery in 66.1%, right coronary artery in 27.2%, and left circumflex artery in 6.7% of the cases. The respective rate of anatomical and procedural success was 94.4% and 90%. The rates of mortality, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and reinfarction were 6.7%, 1.1%, and 2.2%, respectively. Most patients were discharged with no complications in less than a week. Anatomical success in patients <65 years old was 95% versus 92.5% for those ³ 65 years of age. Procedural success in patients <65 years of age was 93.6% versus 77.5% for those ³ 65 years old (P<0.05). No significant relation was detected between the success rate and sex, target vessel, or major coronary artery disease risk factors. More patients in the mortality group had a longer door-to-balloon (DTB) time compared to the surviving group (P<0.05). Conclusion: In light of the results of this study, primary PCI may also be practiced as the therapy of choice for AMI patients in centers with established equipment in our region with acceptable rates of MACE and complications. Better procedural success rates are achieved in younger patients and in those with a shorter DTB time.
Introduction: Use of risk scoring systems in patients with acute coronary syndrome helps with summarizing important prognostic data of the disease and facilitates calculating confidence limits and comparing survival rates between different treatments. In the present study, the researchers first aimed at assessing mid-term outcome of patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and then determining main predictors of this outcome to improve definitive criteria for designing a risk scoring system in the population.Methods: In a prospective cohort study, 124 patients with NSTEMI, diagnosed according to ACC/AHA guidelines and hospitalized in an academic hospital in 2013, were consecutively assessed. Baseline characteristics were collected via interviewing, physical examination, and reviewing the recorded files. All the patients were followed for one and six months to assess mid-term outcomes regarding mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). MACE is defined as the occurrence of at least one of the events of death, myocardial infarction, repeated revascularization, or re-hospitalization.Results: One-month death occurred in 3.2%, re-hospitalization in 4.0%, and myocardial infarction in none of the patients. In addition, regarding the six-month outcomes status, mortality rate was determined in 6.4%, re-hospitalization in 22.6%, and myocardial infarction in 4.8% of patients. Hence, one- and six-month MACE rates were 7.3% and 27.4%, respectively. Furthermore, three- and six-month survival rates were estimated to be 96.8% and 93.6%, respectively. According to the Cox-proportion hazard modeling, only reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR = 0.909, P = 0.017), history of chronic kidney injury (HR = 8.884, P = 0.005), and Inotrope use (HR = 35.759, P = 0.012) could predict the six-month MACE. None of the other indexes including general coronary risk factors, echocardiography parameters, and level of cardiac enzymes could predict mortality rate.Conclusions: Patients with NSTEMI may face high six-month MACE which can be predicted by low LVEF, history of renal injury and use of inotrope. Therefore, to define risk stratification system, these indicators should be considered as well.
Currently, the basis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) therapy is dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with Aspirin as a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and clopidogrel as adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists. Therefore, the aim of the present systematic review is to answer that should DAPT with Aspirin and clopidogrel be continued until coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who have ACS? The search for relevant studies in the present meta-analysis is based on three approaches: A) systematic searches in electronic databases, B) manual searches in Google and Google Scholar, and C) screening of bibliography of related original and review articles. The endpoints included mortality rate, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), reoperation, re-exploration, other cardiac events, renal failure, length of ICU and hospital stay, chest tube drainage and blood product transfusion after CABG. After the initial screening, 41 articles were studied in detail, and finally the data of 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. DAPT before CABG in patients with ACS does not increase the rate of mortality, CVA, renal failure, MI, and other cardiac events, but increases reoperation, re-exploration, length of ICU, and hospital stay. Chest tube drainage and blood product transfusion rate significantly increased in the DAPT group compared to the control group (non-antiplatelet or Aspirin alone). Increase in chest tube drainage and blood product transfusion rate indicates an increase in bleeding, so increase in reoperation, re-exploration to control bleeding, and, subsequently, increase in the length of ICU and hospital stay are expected. DAPT with Aspirin and clopidogrel before CABG in patients with ACS does not increase the rate of mortality, CVA, renal failure, MI, and other cardiac events despite more bleedings, and it may be suggested before CABG for better graft patency.