PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ignacio Ferreira-González

Publications and source records attributed to Ignacio Ferreira-González.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators: a systematic review.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy for preventing implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a systematic literature search to identify all randomized, controlled trials assessing the efficacy of adjunctive antiarrhythmic drug therapy. Trial data were reviewed and extracted independently by two investigators in an unblinded, standardized manner. Eight trials including a total of 1889 patients were analysed. There was heterogeneity in the type of antiarrhythmic used in the treatment arm (amiodarone, sotalol, azimilide, and dofetilide) as well as in the control group (five trials compared with placebo and three trials compared with beta-blocker). The main outcome, risk of shock therapy, was reduced when comparing amiodarone plus beta-blocker with beta-blocker alone (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.14-0.52) and when comparing sotalol with placebo (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.4-0.78). The effect was not conclusive when comparing sotalol with other beta-blocker (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.37-1) and azimilide or dofetilide with placebo (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.58-1.04 and HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.04, respectively). Although there were some benefits for secondary outcomes in all antiarrhythmics, the magnitude of the benefit was higher with amiodarone. CONCLUSION: Amiodarone is the most effective treatment to reduce ICD shock therapies. The benefit of other antiarrhythmics is limited to secondary outcomes.

Anti-Arrhythmia Agents↗

[Evaluation of risk-adjusted hospital mortality after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the Catalan public healthcare system. Influence of hospital management type (ARCA Study)].

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Previous studies suggest that the effectiveness of coronary surgery is influenced by the type of management at the healthcare centre where the intervention is performed. The present study assessed the risk-adjusted hospital mortality of coronary surgery in the Catalan healthcare system in hospitals under either private or public management. METHODS: We carried out a prospective study of all consecutive patients receiving a first coronary artery bypass graft, with public financial support, in a period of 2 years at 5 hospitals under either public or private management. Preoperative risk was assessed using the EuroSCORE and Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment (CAHTA) predictive models. RESULTS: Overall, 1605 patients underwent interventions, 21% of which were at private hospitals. The percentage of patients undergoing non-elective surgery was higher at private hospitals (64% vs 50%), as was the percentage needing intravenous nitrates (17% vs 11%) and the percentage in functional class IV (20% vs 11%). The odds ratio for in-hospital mortality in private compared with public hospitals was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.29-1.06) when adjusted for EuroSCORE, 0.56 (95% CI, 0.29-1.07) when adjusted for CAHTA score, and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.21-0.87) when adjusted for patient characteristics. The mortality observed, 4.8% (95% CI 3.8-5.6), was not significantly higher than that predicted. CONCLUSIONS: a) Hospital mortality was equivalent to or lower than that expected after adjustment for the 2 risk scores; b) after adjustment for baseline patient characteristics, the results favored privately managed centers; and c) comparison with previous results suggests that coronary surgery effectiveness has improved in recent years.

Adult↗