PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A K Gitt

Publications and source records attributed to A K Gitt.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Effectiveness of the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist abciximab during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in clinical practice at a single high-volume center.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa antagonist abciximab is able to reduce ischemic complications during percutaneous transluminal coronary interventions (PCIs). Its effectiveness in daily clinical practice in unselected patients remains to be determined. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: From 7/1997 until 12/2000, 3310 PCIs were performed at the Heart Center Ludwigshafen. Out of them, 1076 (32.5%) patients were nonrandomly treated with a GP IIb/ IIa antagonist. Patients who were treated with abciximab were matched with patients not treated with abciximab. The matching procedure resulted in 590 pairs of patients. RESULTS: Patients treated with abciximab were more likely to have a history of former PCI (13.7% versus 8.8%, p=0.008) or coronary artery bypass surgery (19.2% versus 12.8%, p=0.003). There were no differences in concomitant diseases, left ventricular function, number of vessels diseased or target vessel. However, patients treated with abciximab had a higher rate of more complex stenosis (> or =B2; 94.4% versus 80.7%, p<0.001) and a longer x-ray exposition (median 486 s versus 422 s, p<0.001). Treatment with abciximab was associated with a significantly lower incidence of the combined endpoint of death, reinfarction or stroke during the hospital stay (2.4% versus 4.4%, p=0.039). This was confirmed after adjustment for confounding parameters (p=0.034). There was no increase in the rate of severe bleeding in the abciximab group (p=0.347). After one year the rates for the combined endpoint were 8.5% in the control group and 6.2% in the abciximab group (univariate analysis, p=0.134; multivariate analysis, p=0.143). CONCLUSION: Treatment with abciximab during PCI in daily clinical practice at a high volume center in patients with a high rate of acute coronary syndromes seems to be as effective as shown in RCTs.

Abciximab↗
PubMed2002

[Long-term follow-up of patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty or thrombolysis. Results of the MITRA trial].

Long-term follow-up after treatment with primary angioplasty compared to treatment with thrombolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains still to be determined. We therefore analyzed the data of the "Maximal Individual Therapy" in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA-1) Registry. Follow-up data for a median of 17 months after discharge were available in 2090 out of 2195 (95%) AMI patients treated with thrombolysis, as well as 293 out of 312 patients (94%) treated with primary angioplasty. There were only small differences in patient characteristics between the two treatment groups. Compared to patients treated with thrombolysis, those treated with primary angioplasty had a higher prevalence of prior myocardial infarction (16.4% versus 12.2%, p = 0.04), longer prehospital delay: 10 minutes (130 minutes versus 120 minutes, p = 0.002), and a longer door-to-treatment time: 45 minutes (p < 0.001). Primary angioplasty patients were more likely to be treated with beta-blockers (primary angioplasty 79.8% versus thrombolysis 66.2%, p < 0.001) or statins (24.5% versus 16.5%, p < 0.001). There was no difference between the treatment groups for total mortality (p = 0.90) nor for the combined endpoint of death or re-infarction (p = 0.85). However, the combined endpoint of death, re-infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass surgery was significantly lower in the primary angioplasty group (primary angioplasty 25.6% versus thrombolysis 32.3%, univariate odds ratio 0.72, 95% CI: 0.55-0.95, p = 0.02). This result was confirmed by multivariate analysis after adjusting for confounding parameters (multivariate odds ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42-0.91). The beneficial effect of primary angioplasty compared to thrombolysis achieved during the hospital stay after an AMI is maintained during a 17 month follow-up. AMI patients treated with thrombolysis were more likely to be treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass surgery after discharge.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

A prospective survey of the characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes in Europe and the Mediterranean basin; the Euro Heart Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes (Euro Heart Survey ACS).

AIMS: To better delineate the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in representative countries across Europe and the Mediterranean basin, and to examine adherence to current guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a prospective survey (103 hospitals, 25 countries) of 10484 patients with a discharge diagnosis of acute coronary syndromes. The initial diagnosis was ST elevation ACS in 42.3%, non-ST elevation ACS in 51.2%, and undetermined electrocardiogram ACS in 6.5%. The discharge diagnosis was Q wave myocardial infarction in 32.8%, non-Q wave myocardial infarction in 25.3%, and unstable angina in 41.9%. The use of aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, and heparins for patients with ST elevation ACS were 93.0%, 77.8%, 62.1%, and 86.8%, respectively, with corresponding rates of 88.5%, 76.6%, 55.8%, and 83.9% for non-ST elevation ACS patients. Coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary interventions, and coronary bypass surgery were performed in 56.3%, 40.4%, and 3.4% of ST elevation ACS patients, respectively, with corresponding rates of 52.0%, 25.4%, and 5.4% for non-ST elevation ACS patients. Among patients with ST elevation ACS, 55.8% received reperfusion treatment; 35.1% fibrinolytic therapy and 20.7% primary percutaneous coronary interventions. The in-hospital mortality of patients with ST elevation ACS was 7.0%, for non-ST elevation ACS 2.4%, and for undetermined electrocardiogram ACS 11.8%. At 30 days, mortality was 8.4%, 3.5%, and 13.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrates the discordance between existing guidelines for ACS and current practice across a broad region in Europe and the Mediterranean basin and more extensively reflects the outcomes of ACS in real practice in this region.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2002

[Use of heparin in acute myocardial infarction in routine clinical practice in Germany. Results of the MITRA and MIR registries].

OBJECTIVE: Among other adjunctive medication, heparin is widely used in the therapy of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) today. Large randomized trials, however, have shown inconclusive data on the benefit of adjunctive heparin therapy for patients with AMI. The aim of this study was to describe the use of heparin and complication rates in routine clinical practice today. METHODS: MITRA and MIR were multicenter registries of AMI patients in Germany. During the years 1994 to 1998, 22,697 patients were registered with MITRA and MIR. Of these patients 49.9% received reperfusion therapy. RESULTS: 21,004 patients (92%) received heparin during acute therapy of AMI. The following factors were associated with withholding heparin: Bleeding at admission (OR 4.7; CI 3.2-6.8), cardiogenic shock (OR 1.8; CI 1.4-2.3) and fibrinolytic therapy with streptokinase (OR 2.1; CI 1.8-2.3). Complication rates of patients with heparin were only slightly higher than among those without heparin: 1.7% strokes and 1.9% bleedings were reported among the patients with fibrinolysis and heparin compared to 1.3% strokes and 1.4% bleedings among patients without heparin (p = ns). Mortality rates were 14.1% for patients with and 27.3% for patients without heparin (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Of the patients in MITRA and MIR 92% received heparin during AMI. Patients with active bleeding or in critical condition received heparin significantly less often. The selection of critically ill patients may have contributed to the high mortality of patients without heparin for AMI. Bleeding complication rates of patients with adjunctive heparin were only slightly higher than reported in randomized trials.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction: can we define subgroups of patients benefiting most from primary angioplasty? Results from the pooled data of the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry and the Myocardial Infarction Registry.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the effectiveness of primary angioplasty compared with thrombolysis in clinical practice. BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, primary angioplasty for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has not yet been proven more effective than intravenous thrombolysis, nor have subgroups of patients been identified who would perhaps benefit from primary angioplasty. METHODS: The pooled data of two AMI registries--the Maximal Individual TheRapy in Acute myocardial infarction (MITRA) study and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR)--were analyzed. A total of 9,906 lytic-eligible patients with AMI, with a pre-hospital delay of < or =12 h, were treated with either primary angioplasty (n = 1,327) or thrombolysis (n = 8,579). RESULTS: Despite differences in the patients' characteristics and concomitant diseases between the two groups, the prevalence of adverse risk factors was balanced. Univariate analysis of hospital mortality showed a more favorable course for patients treated with primary angioplasty: 6.4% versus 11.3% (odds ratio [OR] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 0.67). This was confirmed by logistic regression analysis (multivariate OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.77). Primary angioplasty was associated with a lower mortality in all subgroups analyzed. We observed a significant correlation between mortality and absolute risk reduction (r = 0.82, p < 0.0001) in the different subgroups: as mortality increased, there was an increase in absolute benefit of primary angioplasty compared with thrombolysis. CONCLUSIONS: These large registry data showed the effect of primary angioplasty to be more favorable than thrombolysis for the treatment of patients with AMI in clinical practice. This effect was not restricted to special subgroups of patients. As mortality increased, the absolute benefit of primary angioplasty also increased.

Aged↗
PubMed2001

[Quality assurance in acute myocardial infarct].

The Ludwigshafen myocardial infarction project has demonstrated, that an intense public media campaign can reduce prehospital delays in acute myocardial infarction. With an additional intrahospital improvement, this can lead to a better and more frequent use of recanalization (thrombolysis or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA]). Several large multicentric registries (60 minutes myocardial infarction project, MIR, MITRA) with a total of about 40,000 patients at over 300 hospitals in Germany showed, that intrahospital improvement of infarction therapy can also be achieved in other hospitals. Voluntary participation in an infarction registry leads to quality control and improvement. Two factors are especially important: (1) documentation of every infarction patient, and (2) documentation of the reasons why therapy was given or withheld in every single patient. The improvement in early therapy is associated with a 20% reduction of hospital mortality (MITRA-1). The media campaign in Ludwigshafen to reduce pre-hospital patient delay, however, could not yet be carried out in other areas effectively and intensely enough.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcome of stroke after acute myocardial infarction in clinical practice. MIR and MITRA Study Groups. Myocardial Infarction Registry. Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction .

In this analysis of ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 21,330 consecutively included patients with AMI, we found an incidence of stroke after AMI of 1.2% and a very poor prognosis. Previous stroke, atrial fibrillation, and older age were the strongest predictors of stroke after AMI; thrombolysis was a borderline risk factor and early therapy with aspirin was associated with a reduction in stroke after AMI.

Aged↗
PubMed2001

Effect of preinfarction angina pectoris on outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty (results from the Myocardial Infarction Registry.

Preinfarction angina is associated with better clinical outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who receive intravenous thrombolysis. This has not been proved in patients with AMI treated with primary angioplasty. We analyzed the data of the prospective multicenter Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR). Of 14,440 patients with AMI, 774 with a prehospital delay of < or =12 hours were treated with primary angioplasty. Five hundred thirty-two patients (68.7%) had preinfarction angina. Patients with preinfarction angina were slightly older than patients without (63 vs 62 years, p = 0.042), prehospital delay was 1 hour longer (180 vs 120 minutes, p = 0.001), and arterial hypertension was more prevalent (47.6% vs 32.2%, odds ratio [OR] 1.91, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.39 to 2.62). There was no significant difference in hospital mortality (5.6% vs 3.3%, OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.87), reinfarction, stroke, or the combined end point of death, reinfarction, or stroke between the 2 groups. Logistic regression analysis showed no association of preinfarction angina with the occurrence of either death (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.91 to 6.08) or the combined end points (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.31). There was also no significant difference in mortality (6% vs 5.1%, OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.56 to 2.52), reinfarction, stroke, postinfarction angina, or the combined end points between patients with preinfarction angina within 48 hours compared with patients with preinfarction angina between 49 hours and 4 weeks before the AMI. Thus, the MIR data showed no protective effects of preinfarction angina in patients with AMI treated with primary angioplasty.

Angina Pectoris↗
PubMed2001

[Current prescription practice of CSE inhibitors at clinic discharge after acute myocardial infarct].

We investigated the use of statins in clinical practice in patients with acute myocardial infarction in Germany in 17,732 consecutively included patients of the registries MIR-1 and MITRA-1. A clinical follow-up has been performed in the MITRA-1 study after a mean period of 18 months. In total 30% of all patients with acute myocardial infarction received statins at discharge. From 1994 to 1998 the use of statins increased from 6% to 44%; however in 1998 still less than half of the patients with acute myocardial infarction received statins at discharge. In a logistic regression model, concomittant diseases as renal failure (OR 0.7), heart failure (OR 0.7) and diabetes mellitus (OR 0.9) were associated with a lower use of statins. Age > 70 years (OR 0.5) was also associated with a lower use of statins at hospital discharge. Patients with statins at discharge had a lower long-term mortality of 5.8% versus 12.9% in patients without statins. After adjustment to age and comorbidity, use of statins at discharge was associated with a borderline significant reduction of long-term mortality (multivariate OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.0). In a subgroup analysis of therapeutic benefit, measured by the "number needed to treat" (NNT), the number of patients to treat with statins to save one life, patients with cardiovascular risk factors, as heart failure (NNT 7.5), diabetes mellitus (NNT 7.8) and age > 70 years (NNT 13.8) had a larger therapeutic benefit as patients without these risk factors (NNT 345). However, these high-risk patients received less often statins than patients without risk factors (use of statins 11.8% versus 19.8%).

Aged↗
PubMed2001

Differences in treatment and outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to hospitals with compared to without departments of cardiology; results from the pooled data of the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA 1+2) Registries and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR).

AIMS: The specialty of the admitting physician may influence treatment and outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS: The pooled data of three German acute myocardial infarction registries: the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) 1+2 studies and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR) were analysed. Patients admitted to hospitals with departments of cardiology were compared to hospitals without such departments. A total of 24 814 acute myocardial infarction patients were included, 9020 (36%) patients at 91 (29.8%) hospitals with departments of cardiology and 15 794 (64%) at 214 (70.2%) hospitals without cardiology departments. There were only minor differences in patient characteristics and prevalence of concomitant diseases between the two types of hospital. The first electrocardiogram was more often diagnostic at hospitals with cardiology departments (71.8% vs 66.5%, P<0.001). Reperfusion therapy and adjunctive medical therapy, such as aspirin, beta-blockers and ACE-inhibitors were used more often at cardiology departments (all P -values <0.001), even after adjustment for confounding parameters. Treatment improved at both types of hospital over time. Admission to a hospital with a department of cardiology was independently associated with a lower hospital mortality (14.2% vs 15.4%, adjusted OR=0.91; 95%CI: 0.83-0.99). Additional logistic regression models showed that the higher use of reperfusion therapy and recommended concomitant medical therapy was responsible for most of the survival benefit at such hospitals. CONCLUSION: Treatment of acute myocardial infarction patients at hospitals with departments of cardiology was independently associated with a higher use of recommended therapy and a lower hospital mortality compared to hospitals without such departments.

Aged↗
PubMed2001

Characterization and clinical course of patients not receiving aspirin for acute myocardial infarction: results from the MITRA and MIR studies.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have shown the efficacy of aspirin for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, not all patients receive aspirin for AMI. The aim of this study was to provide information on characteristics and clinical course of patients not treated with aspirin for AMI. METHODS: We analyzed the data of the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR) and the Maximal Individual Therapy of Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) registry. MITRA and MIR were prospective multicenter registries of patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction in Germany. RESULTS: Of 22,572 patients registered from 1994 to 1998, 1767 (7.8%) did not receive aspirin within the first 48 hours after admission. Multivariate analysis revealed two main factors associated with withholding aspirin for AMI: relative contraindications to aspirin (gastric ulcer [odds ratio (OR) 4.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7-5.7], renal insufficiency [OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.8]), and critical clinical state at admission (cardiogenic shock [OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-2.1] and prehospital resuscitation [OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.2]). In addition, these patients were significantly less likely to receive reperfusion therapy and adjunctive medical therapy such as beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. In-hospital mortality after adjustment for baseline characteristics was 27.2% in patients without aspirin compared with 11.1% in patients treated with aspirin. CONCLUSIONS: Only a minority of AMI patients (7.8%) did not receive aspirin. Relative contraindications to aspirin and a critical clinical state at admission were the main factors associated with withholding aspirin for AMI. Even after adjustment for patient characteristics, the mortality of patients without aspirin was almost three times higher.

Aged↗
PubMed2001

Impact of prehospital delay on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty and intravenous thrombolysis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis, longer times to treatment are associated with increasingly worse clinical outcome. This relation may be different for treatment with primary angioplasty. METHODS: We analyzed the pooled data of the German acute myocardial infarction registries Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) and Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR) to determine the influence of prehospital delays on hospital mortality rates. Primary angioplasty was performed in 1063 patients and thrombolysis in 7552 patients. RESULTS: In patients treated with thrombolysis, in-hospital time to treatment was constantly 30 minutes median. In patients treated with primary angioplasty, in-hospital time to treatment increased from 60 minutes median up to 87 minutes median with increasing prehospital delay. Hospital mortality rates slightly decreased with increasing prehospital delays in patients treated with primary angioplasty (P for trend =.02). However, in patients treated with thrombolysis, mortality rate was nonsignificantly increased (P for trend =.11). Logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference in mortality rates between primary angioplasty and thrombolysis for prehospital delays of <3 hours. However, when prehospital delay was >3 hours, thrombolysis was independently associated with a higher mortality rate compared with primary angioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with thrombolysis, primary angioplasty is independently associated with a lower mortality rate in prehospital delays of >3 hours. The reason for this may be a time-dependent loss of efficacy to achieve reperfusion for thrombolysis but not for primary angioplasty.

Angioplasty, Balloon↗
PubMed2001

Primary angioplasty versus no reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction and a pre-hospital delay of > 12-24 hours: results from the pooled data of the maximal individual therapy in acute myocardial infarction (MITRA) registry and the myocardial infarction registry (MIR).

OBJECTIVE: In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), treatment with thrombolysis is superior to no reperfusion therapy only up to 12 hours after the onset of symptoms. There are no data addressing whether this time limit is also justified for treatment with primary angioplasty. DESIGN: The pooled data of two German ST-segment elevation AMI registries, the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) study and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR), were analyzed. PATIENTS: Out of 22,749 patients, eight hundred and forty-eight with a pre-hospital delay of > 12 hours and < or = 24 hours were treated with either primary angioplasty (94/848; 11.1%) or no reperfusion therapy (754/848; 88.9%). RESULTS: Patients treated with primary angioplasty were 10 years younger (59 years versus 69 years; p = 0.001), more often male [72.3% versus 59.9%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.36-0.92] and less likely to be diabetics (17% versus 27.2%; OR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.31-0.97). Hospital mortality was 8.5% in patients treated with primary angioplasty compared to 17.1% in patients with no reperfusion therapy (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.21-0.95; p = 0.033) and the combined endpoint (death, reinfarction or stroke) occurred significantly less often (11.7% versus 20.3%; OR = 0.52; 95% CI =0.27-1; p = 0.045). However, multiple logistic regression showed only a non-significant trend for lower mortality (OR = 0.54; 95% CI =0.20-1.23) and the combined endpoint (OR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.29-1.31) in patients treated with primary angioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: These data show the possibility of a benefit of primary angioplasty over conservative treatment in patients with pre-hospital delays of > 12 up to 24 hours, although multiple logistic regression analysis failed to find significant differences between treatments. This might be due to inadequate study power or a selection bias. These findings encourage further investigation of this subject.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2000

Transfer of patients with acute myocardial infarction for primary or acute angioplasty from hospitals without the facilities to perform angioplasty. Results from the pooled data of the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) Registry and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR).

In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) admitted at hospitals without angioplasty facilities there are some subgroups of patients which seem to profit from a transfer to primary or acute angioplasty. However, current clinical practice at such hospitals is unknown. We analyzed the pooled data of the German acute myocardial infarction registries MITRA and the MIR. Angioplasty was not available at 221/271 hospitals (81.5%). Out of 14,487 patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to these hospitals, 50.1% (7,259/14,487) received thrombolysis at the initial hospital and 3.6% (523/14,487) were transferred. Out of the transferred patients, 55.3% (289/523) were treated with primary angioplasty and 44.7% (234/523) received a combination of thrombolysis and angioplasty. The proportion of transferred patients increased from 1.1% in 1994 to 5.5% in 1998 (p for trend = 0.001). One hundred and four hospitals (47.1%) never transferred patients. Patients transferred for primary angioplasty (289 patients) were compared to patients treated with thrombolysis at the initial hospitals (7,259 patients). Multivariate analysis showed the following independent predictors for transfer of patients for primary angioplasty: contraindications for thrombolysis (OR = 17.9), a non-diagnostic first ECG (OR = 4.0), pre-hospital delay > 6 hours (OR = 2.5), unknown symptom onset of the acute myocardial infarction (OR = 2.0) and anterior wall acute myocardial infarction (OR = 1.6). Heart failure at admission was the only independent predictor not to transfer patients (OR = 0.40). In Germany only 47.1% of hospitals without angioplasty facilities transfer patients with acute myocardial infarction to primary or acute angioplasty. The proportion of transferred patients increased from 1.1% in 1994 to 5.5% in 1998. Contraindications for thrombolysis were the strongest predictor to transfer patients to primary angioplasty.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Decreasing hospital mortality between 1994 and 1998 in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty but not in patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis. Results from the pooled data of the Maximal Individual Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) Registry and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR).

OBJECTIVES: We investigated changes in the clinical outcome of primary angioplasty and thrombolysis for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from 1994 to 1998. BACKGROUND: Primary angioplasty for the treatment of AMI is a sophisticated technical procedure that requires experienced personnel and optimized hospital logistics. Growing experience with primary angioplasty in clinical routine and new adjunctive therapies may have improved the outcome over the years. METHODS: The pooled data of two German AMI registries: the Maximal Individual Therapy in AMI (MITRA) study and the Myocardial Infarction Registry (MIR) were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 10,118 lytic eligible patients with AMI, 1,385 (13.7%) were treated with primary angioplasty, and 8,733 (86.3%) received intravenous thrombolysis. Patients characteristics were quite balanced between the two treatment groups, but there was a higher proportion of patients with a prehospital delay of >6 h in those treated with primary angioplasty. The proportion of an in-hospital delay of more than 90 min significantly decreased in patients treated with primary angioplasty over the years (p for trend = 0.015, multivariate odds ratio [OR] for each year of the observation period = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-0.96) but did not change significantly in patients treated with thrombolysis. Hospital mortality decreased significantly in the primary angioplasty group (p = 0.003 for trend; multivariate OR for each year = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.93). However, for patients treated with thrombolysis, hospital mortality did not change significantly (p for trend 0.175, multivariate OR for each year: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.94- 1.11). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with thrombolysis the clinical results of primary angioplasty for the treatment of AMI improved from 1994 to 1998. This indicates a beneficial effect of the growing experience and optimized hospital logistics of this technique over the years.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed1999

[1998 prognosis of left ventricular dysfunction in a maximum care non-university hospital. Analysis of the Ludwigshafen LVD Registry].

BACKGROUND: Prognostic data on heart failure rely on epidemiological studies or large clinical trials. These data are not to transfer easily on everyday practice. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognosis of left ventricular dysfunction under the therapeutic conditions of the 1990s. SETTING: Nonuniversity tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Since January 1995 consecutive and complete registry of all inpatients presenting with a left ventricular dysfunction (EF < 45%). No exclusion criteria. RESULTS: n = 512, mean age 64 years, 77% male, mean NYHA class 2.5, left ventricular EF 31%. ETIOLOGY: 58% coronary heart disease, 28% dilated cardiomyopathy. Medical treatment consisting of 91% ACE inhibitors, ACE inhibitor dosage 52% of the recommended dose, 42% beta-blockers, 70% diuretics, and 63% digitalis. Follow-up completeness 95.5%. One-year mortality 64/489 patients (13.9%). Determinants of mortality: NYHA III/IV, EF < 30%, malignant disease, age > 75 years. CONCLUSION: In spite of the aforementioned medical treatment and a proportion of 14.8% implanted defibrillators in 1998, the one-year mortality of ventricular dysfunction is as high as 13.9%. In everyday practice the prognostic effect of ACE inhibition and beta-blockade is not completely utilized.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1994

[Cardiopulmonary capacity in patients before and after prosthetic valve replacement].

In this study we wanted to investigate if noninvasive cardiopulmonary exercise testing can be securely, accurately applied in patients with acquired cardiac valve disease pre- and postoperatively with any convenience. Furthermore, we looked if the cardiopulmonary exercise capacity (anaerobic threshold, etc.) was improved postoperatively (3 and 6 months) in 15 patients suffering from severe mitral valve disease as compared to the preoperative condition. The symptom-limited cardiopulmonary exercise testing was performed on a bike in a semi-supine position using a ramp program (+20 W/min). The following parameters were continuously monitored, and the breath-by-breath gas exchange values documented: cardiocirculatory parameters (heart rate; blood pressure; surface ECG; exercise capacity in Watts); gas-exchange parameters (O2-uptake VO2; CO2-production VCO2; respiratory anaerobic threshold VO2 AT; gas-exchange ratio VCO2/VO2; O2-pulse VO2/HR; aerobic capacity delta VO2/delta WR) and ventilatory parameters (respiratory rate; tidal volume Vt; minute ventilation VE; equivalent for O2: VE/VO2 and CO2: VE/VCO2). The 155 cardio-pulmonary exercise tests in 115 patients were practicable, safe (no emergency case) and accurate. In 100 patients late postoperatively (68.3 +/- 53.0 -102.9 +/- 41.2 months) after aortic or mitral valve replacement or both without signs of significant hemolysis or prosthetic valve dysfunction the NYHA classification was too imprecise to characterize the actual exercise capacity of the patients (e.g., NYHA class II: Weber class B to E). Patients with aortic valve prosthesis had a significantly better anaerobic threshold (57.4 +/- 19.1% pred. value max. VO2) as compared to those with mitral valve replacement (mean: 35.9% pred. value max. VO2).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗