No abstract

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

BACKGROUND It is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm. METHODS We designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause. RESULTS The rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P = 0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P = 0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = 0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized.

No abstract

BackgroundHost factors and complications have been associated with higher mortality in infective endocarditis (IE). We sought to develop and validate a model of clinical characteristics to predict 6‐month mortality in IE.Methods and ResultsUsing a large multinational prospective registry of definite IE (International Collaboration on Endocarditis [ICE]–Prospective Cohort Study [PCS], 2000–2006, n=4049), a model to predict 6‐month survival was developed by Cox proportional hazards modeling with inverse probability weighting for surgery treatment and was internally validated by the bootstrapping method. This model was externally validated in an independent prospective registry (ICE‐PLUS, 2008–2012, n=1197). The 6‐month mortality was 971 of 4049 (24.0%) in the ICE‐PCS cohort and 342 of 1197 (28.6%) in the ICE‐PLUS cohort. Surgery during the index hospitalization was performed in 48.1% and 54.0% of the cohorts, respectively. In the derivation model, variables related to host factors (age, dialysis), IE characteristics (prosthetic or nosocomial IE, causative organism, left‐sided valve vegetation), and IE complications (severe heart failure, stroke, paravalvular complication, and persistent bacteremia) were independently associated with 6‐month mortality, and surgery was associated with a lower risk of mortality (Harrell's C statistic 0.715). In the validation model, these variables had similar hazard ratios (Harrell's C statistic 0.682), with a similar, independent benefit of surgery (hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.62–0.89). A simplified risk model was developed by weight adjustment of these variables.ConclusionsSix‐month mortality after IE is ≈25% and is predicted by host factors, IE characteristics, and IE complications. Surgery during the index hospitalization is associated with lower mortality but is performed less frequently in the highest risk patients. A simplified risk model may be used to identify specific risk subgroups in IE.