Among selected patients who had received a cardiac transplant more than 6 months previously and who were at a low risk for rejection, a strategy of monitoring for rejection that involved gene-expression profiling, as compared with routine biopsies, was not associated with an increased risk of serious adverse outcomes and resulted in the performance of significantly fewer biopsies. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00351559.)
The outcome of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction has not appreciably changed in the last 30 years despite the development of various percutaneous mechanical circulatory support options. It is clear that there are varying degrees of cardiogenic shock but there is no robust classification scheme to categorize this disease state.
A multidisciplinary group of experts convened by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions was assembled to derive a proposed classification schema for cardiogenic shock. Representatives from cardiology (interventional, advanced heart failure, noninvasive), emergency medicine, critical care, and cardiac nursing all collaborated to develop the proposed schema.
A system describing stages of cardiogenic shock from A to E was developed. Stage A is “at risk” for cardiogenic shock, stage B is “beginning” shock, stage C is “classic” cardiogenic shock, stage D is “deteriorating”, and E is “extremis”. The difference between stages B and C is the presence of hypoperfusion which is present in stages C and higher. Stage D implies that the initial set of interventions chosen have not restored stability and adequate perfusion despite at least 30 minutes of observation and stage E is the patient in extremis, highly unstable, often with cardiovascular collapse.
This proposed classification system is simple, clinically applicable across the care spectrum from pre‐hospital providers to intensive care staff but will require future validation studies to assess its utility and potential prognostic implications.
Cardiac transplantation remains the only definitive treatment for end-stage heart failure. Transplantation rates are limited by a shortage of donor hearts. This shortage is magnified because many hearts are discarded because of strict selection criteria and concern for regulatory reprimand for less-than-optimal posttransplant outcomes. There is no standardized approach to donor selection despite proposals to liberalize acceptance criteria. A donor heart selection conference was organized to facilitate discussion and generate ideas for future research. The event was attended by 66 participants from 41 centers with considerable experience in cardiac donor selection. There were state-of-the-art presentations on donor selection, with subsequent breakout sessions on standardizing the process and increasing utilization of donor hearts. Participants debated misconceptions and established agreement on donor and recipient risk factors for donor selection and identified the components necessary for a future donor risk score. Ideas for future initiatives include modification of regulatory practices to consider extended criteria donors when evaluating outcomes and prospective studies aimed at identifying the factors leading to nonacceptance of available donor hearts. With agreement on the most important donor and recipient risk factors, it is anticipated that a consistent approach to donor selection will improve rates of heart transplantation.
To define the natural history of bone loss around a femoral prosthesis, the bone mineral content and bone mineral density were measured for each femur in 28 patients with unilateral total hip arthroplasty, 18 age-matched controls, and seven patients with unilateral osteoarthritis. The areas measured were inside the lesser trochanter and 4.8 cm distal to it. The contralateral hip served as the control. Three years after arthroplasty there was 40% loss in average bone mineral content inside the lesser trochanter, and 28% loss in average bone mineral content 4.8 cm distally in the medial cortex. At seven to 14 years after operation, patients had lost 40% of bone proximally and 49% distally. The data suggest that this may progress in a proximal-to-distal fashion, and could account for a 50% decrease in bone mass seven to 14 years after surgery.
Background: Patients with concomitant cardiac arrest (CA) and shock are at increased risk of mortality, even when stratified according to shock severity. We sought to determine whether the presence of ventricular fibrillation (VF) modified the relationship between CA and mortality in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed unique Mayo Clinic CICU patients admitted between 2007 and 2015. Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stages A through E were classified at admission. Hospital mortality in each SCAI shock stage was stratified by the presence of CA, VF CA, or non-VF CA. Results: We included 9,898 patients with a mean age of 68 years (38% females). CA was present in 12%, including 53% with VF CA and 47% with non-VF CA. Hospital mortality was higher in patients with CA compared to patients without CA (34% vs. 6%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.1, 95% CI [2.4, 4.0], p < .001), and patients with non-VF CA had higher hospital mortality than patients with VF CA (44% vs. 25%; adjusted OR = 2.1, 95% CI [1.4, 3.0], p < .001). After adjustment, patients with any CA or non-VF CA had higher hospital mortality at each SCAI stage, except stage E (all other p < .05), whereas patients with VF CA did not (all p > .1). Conclusions: CA rhythm modifies the relationship between CA and mortality in CICU patients, when accounting for coma, shock, and organ failure. Outcome studies examining CA in patients with cardiogenic shock need to account for important differences such as CA rhythm.
scite is a Brooklyn-based startup that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.