RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a very early invasive strategy (IS)±revascularisation improves clinical outcomes compared with standard care IS in higher risk patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHODS: Multicentre, randomised, controlled, pragmatic strategy trial of higher risk patients with NSTE-ACS, defined by Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events 2.0 score of ≥118, or ≥90 with at least one additional high-risk feature. Participants were randomly assigned to very early IS±revascularisation (<90 min from randomisation) or standard care IS±revascularisation (<72 hours). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, new myocardial infarction or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. RESULTS: The trial was discontinued early by the funder due to slow recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic. 425 patients were randomised, of whom 413 underwent an IS: 204 to very early IS (median time from randomisation: 1.5 hours (IQR: 0.9-2.0)) and 209 to standard care IS (median: 44.0 hours (IQR: 22.9-72.6)). At 12 months, there was no significant difference in the primary outcome between the early IS (5.9%) and standard IS (6.7%) groups (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.42 to 2.09; p=0.86). The incidence of stroke and major bleeding was similar. The length of hospital stay was reduced with a very early IS (3.9 days (SD 6.5) vs 6.3 days (SD 7.6), p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of very early IS did not improve clinical outcomes compared with a standard care IS in higher risk patients with NSTE-ACS. However, the primary outcome rate was low and the trial was underpowered to detect such a difference. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03707314.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico , Pandemias , Resultado del Tratamiento , Angiografía Coronaria , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) affects 1% of the general population. NOTCH1 was the first gene associated with BAV. The proportion of familial and sporadic BAV disease attributed to NOTCH1 mutations has not been estimated. AIM: The aim of our study was to provide an estimate of familial and sporadic BAV disease attributable to NOTCH1 mutations. METHODS: The population of our study consisted of participants of the University of Leicester Bicuspid aoRtic vAlVe gEnetic research-8 pedigrees with multiple affected family members and 381 sporadic patients. All subjects underwent NOTCH1 sequencing. A systematic literature search was performed in the NCBI PubMed database to identify publications reporting NOTCH1 sequencing in context of congenital heart disease. RESULTS: NOTCH1 sequencing in 36 subjects from 8 pedigrees identified one variant c.873C>G/p.Tyr291* meeting the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics criteria for pathogenicity. No pathogenic or likely pathogenic NOTCH1 variants were identified in 381 sporadic patients. Literature review identified 64 relevant publication reporting NOTCH1 sequencing in 528 pedigrees and 9449 sporadic subjects. After excluding families with syndromic disease pathogenic and likely pathogenic NOTCH1 variants were detected in 9/435 (2.1%; 95% CI: 0.7% to 3.4%) of pedigrees and between 0.05% (95% CI: 0.005% to 0.10%) and 0.08% (95% CI: 0.02% to 0.13%) of sporadic patients. Incomplete penetrance of definitely pathogenic NOTCH1 mutations was observed in almost half of reported pedigrees. CONCLUSIONS: Pathogenic and likely pathogenic NOTCH1 genetic variants explain 2% of familial and <0.1% of sporadic BAV disease and are more likely to associate with tetralogy of Fallot and hypoplastic left heart.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Válvula Aórtica Bicúspide , Enfermedades de las Válvulas Cardíacas , Válvula Aórtica/anomalías , Enfermedades de las Válvulas Cardíacas/epidemiología , Enfermedades de las Válvulas Cardíacas/genética , Humanos , Mutación , Linaje , Receptor Notch1/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning (rIC) is a cardioprotective tool which has shown promise in preclinical and clinical trials in the context of acute ischaemia. Repeated rIC post myocardial infarction may provide additional benefits which have not previously been tested clinically. METHODS: The trial assessed the role of daily rIC in enhancing left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery in patients with impaired LVEF (<45%) after ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI). Patients were recruited from four UK hospitals and randomised to receive either 4 weeks of daily rIC or sham conditioning using the autoRIC Device (CellAegis) starting on day 3 post P-PCI. The primary endpoint was the improvement in LVEF over 4 months assessed by cardiac MRI (CMR). Seventy-three patients (38 cases, 35 controls) completed the study. RESULTS: The treatment and control groups were well matched at baseline including for mean LVEF (42.8% vs 44.3% respectively, p=0.952). There was no difference in the improvement in LVEF over 4 months between the treatment and control groups (4.8%±7.8% vs 4.6%±5.9% respectively, p=0.924). No differences were seen in the secondary outcome measures including changes in infarct size and left ventricular end-diastolic and systolic volumes, major adverse cardiac and cerebral event, mean Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score and change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels. CONCLUSIONS: Daily rIC starting on day 3 and continued for 4 weeks following successful P-PCI for STEMI did not improve LVEF as assessed by CMR after 4 months when compared with a matched control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT0166461.