We have compared the incidence of CNS symptoms and changes in echocardiography and electrophysiology during i.v. infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine and placebo. Acute tolerance of i.v. infusion of 10 mg min-1 was studied in a crossover, randomized, double-blind study in 12 volunteers previously acquainted with the CNS effects of lignocaine. The maximum tolerated dose for CNS symptoms was higher after ropivacaine in nine of 12 subjects and higher after bupivacaine in three subjects. The 95% confidence limits for the difference in mean dose between ropivacaine and bupivacaine were -30 and 7 mg. The maximum tolerated unbound arterial plasma concentration was twice as high after ropivacaine (P < 0.001). Muscular twitching occurred more frequently after bupivacaine (P < 0.05). The time to disappearance of all symptoms was shorter after ropivacaine (P < 0.05). A threshold for CNS toxicity was apparent at a mean free plasma concentration of approximately 0.6 mg litre-1 for ropivacaine and 0.3 mg litre-1 for bupivacaine. Bupivacaine increased QRS width during sinus rhythm compared with placebo (P < 0.001) and ropivacaine (P < 0.01). Bupivacaine reduced both left ventricular systolic and diastolic function compared with placebo (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively), while ropivacaine reduced only systolic function (P < 0.01).
AimsTo evaluate long-term all-cause risk of mortality in women and men hospitalized for the first time with atrial fibrillation (AF) compared with matched controls.Methods and resultsA total of 272 186 patients (44% women) ≤85 years at the time of hospitalization with incidental AF 1995–2008 and 544 344 matched controls free of in-hospital diagnosis of AF were identified. Patients were followed via record linkage of the Swedish National Patient Registry and the Cause of Death Registry. Using Cox regression models, the long-term relative all-cause mortality risk, adjusted for concomitant diseases, in women vs. controls was 2.15, 1.72, and 1.44 (P < 0.001) in the age categories ≤65, 65–74, and 75–85 years, respectively. The corresponding figures for men were 1.76, 1.36, and 1.24 (P < 0.001). Among concomitant diseases, neoplasm, chronic renal failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease contributed most to the increased all-cause mortality vs. controls. In patients with AF as the primary diagnosis, the relative risk of mortality was 1.63, 1.46, and 1.28 (P < 0.001) in women and 1.45, 1.17, and 1.10 (P < 0.001) in men.ConclusionAtrial fibrillation was an independent risk factor of all-cause mortality in patients with incident AF. The concomitant diseases that contributed most were found outside the thromboembolic risk scores. The highest relative risk of mortality was seen in women and in the youngest patients compared with controls, and the differences between genders in each age category were statistically significant.
While management of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients is improved by guideline-conform application of anticoagulant therapy, rate control, rhythm control, and therapy of accompanying heart disease, the morbidity and mortality associated with AF remain unacceptably high. This paper describes the proceedings of the 3rd Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET)/European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) consensus conference that convened over 60 scientists and representatives from industry to jointly discuss emerging therapeutic and diagnostic improvements to achieve better management of AF patients. The paper covers four chapters: (i) risk factors and risk markers for AF; (ii) pathophysiological classification of AF; (iii) relevance of monitored AF duration for AF-related outcomes; and (iv) perspectives and needs for implementing better antithrombotic therapy. Relevant published literature for each section is covered, and suggestions for the improvement of management in each area are put forward. Combined, the propositions formulate a perspective to implement comprehensive management in AF.
AimsTo collect information on the use of the Reveal implantable loop recorder (ILR) in the patient care pathway and to investigate its effectiveness in the diagnosis of unexplained recurrent syncope in everyday clinical practice.Methods and resultsProspective, multicentre, observational study conducted in 2006–2009 in 10 European countries and Israel. Eligible patients had recurrent unexplained syncope or pre-syncope. Subjects received a Reveal Plus, DX or XT. Follow up was until the first recurrence of a syncopal event leading to a diagnosis or for ≥1 year. In the course of the study, patients were evaluated by an average of three different specialists for management of their syncope and underwent a median of 13 tests (range 9–20). Significant physical trauma had been experienced in association with a syncopal episode by 36% of patients. Average follow-up time after ILR implant was 10 ± 6 months. Follow-up visit data were available for 570 subjects. The percentages of patients with recurrence of syncope were 19, 26, and 36% after 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Of 218 events within the study, ILR-guided diagnosis was obtained in 170 cases (78%), of which 128 (75%) were cardiac.ConclusionA large number of diagnostic tests were undertaken in patients with unexplained syncope without providing conclusive data. In contrast, the ILR revealed or contributed to establishing the mechanism of syncope in the vast majority of patients. The findings support the recommendation in current guidelines that an ILR should be implanted early rather than late in the evaluation of unexplained syncope.
This first prospective randomized study showed that combining MVS with epicardial LA cryoablation is significantly better in eliminating pre-operative permanent AF than MVS alone.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization 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.