PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

James J Ferguson

Publications and source records attributed to James J Ferguson.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Bleeding complications in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing early invasive management can be reduced with radial access, smaller sheath sizes, and timely sheath removal.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to analyze the impact of arterial access site, sheath size, timing of sheath removal, and use of access site closure devices on high-risk patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND: In the SYNERGY trial, 9,978 patients with ACS were randomly assigned to receive enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. METHODS: This analysis includes 9,404 patients for whom sheath access information was obtained for the first PCI procedure or diagnostic catheterization. Comparisons of baseline, angiographic, and procedural characteristics were carried out according to access site and sheath size. RESULTS: Overall, 9,404 (94%) patients underwent angiography at a median of 21 hr (25th and 75th percentiles: 5, 42) and 4,687 (50%) underwent PCI at a median of 23 hr (6,49) of enrollment. The access site was femoral for 94.9% of cases, radial for 4.4%, and brachial for 0.7%. Radial access was associated with fewer transfusions than femoral access (0.9% vs. 4.8%, P=0.007). For femoral access, the rates of noncoronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)-related TIMI major bleeding by sheath size was 1.5% for 4 or 5 French (Fr), 1.6% for 6 Fr, 3.3% for 7 Fr, and 3.8% for >or=8 Fr (P<0.0001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, femoral access site, larger sheath size, and delayed sheath removal were independent predictors of need for transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Smaller sheaths, radial access, and timely sheath removal may mitigate the bleeding risk associated with potent antithrombotic/platelet therapy and early catheterization.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

A subgroup analysis of the impact of prerandomization antithrombin therapy on outcomes in the SYNERGY trial: enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of receiving pretreatment with antithrombin before randomization as well as overall efficacy and safety of enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the SYNERGY (Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization, and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors) trial. BACKGROUND: The SYNERGY trial results demonstrated noninferiority in outcomes with enoxaparin compared with UFH. Randomized treatment was independent of prerandomization treatment. METHODS: Analyses were first performed on the 4 prerandomization subgroups: patients who received no antithrombin therapy and those who were treated with enoxaparin or UFH or both. Then, we focused on the subgroup of patients who received no pretreatment or were pretreated with and randomized to the same drug. Of the 9,978 patients, 2,440 did not receive prerandomization therapy and 6,138 received consistent therapy through randomization. The primary end point was the composite of death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. RESULTS: After adjustment for differences among the subgroups, no significant difference in the association between the 4 pretreatment groups and death or MI remained (p = 0.171). The randomized treatment effect on 30-day death or MI tended to vary with pretreatment (p = 0.055 for interaction test after adjustment). Patients who received consistent therapy with enoxaparin had significantly less death or MI than patients randomized to UFH (adjusted p = 0.041) with a trend toward increased bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with antithrombin therapy before randomization had potential impact on comparison of study drug effects. After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics between subgroups, consistent therapy with enoxaparin might be superior to UFH in reducing death or nonfatal MI, with a modest excess in bleeding.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Efficacy and safety of enoxaparin compared with unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors (SYNERGY) trial.

BACKGROUND: Enoxaparin reduces ischemic events more effectively than unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients treated conservatively for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. The SYNERGY trial compared these agents in high-risk patients undergoing early invasive treatment. Enoxaparin was noninferior to UFH for the 30-day primary end point of death/myocardial infarction (MI), but modestly increased bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article compares the outcomes of the 4687 SYNERGY patients (47%) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, who were randomized to receive enoxaparin or UFH. Antithrombotic therapy was administered prerandomization in 78%. Crossover (usually in the catheterization laboratory) to the alternative antithrombotic occurred in 14.6% of enoxaparin patients and 2.9% of UFH-treated patients (P < .0001). Stenting was performed in 86.3%. Abrupt vessel closure occurred in 1.3% of enoxaparin patients and 1.7% of UFH-treated patients (P = .318). The rates of death/MI were similar at 30 days (13.1% with enoxaparin vs 14.2% with UFH, P = .289). GUSTO severe bleeding occurred with similar frequency in both groups (1.5% vs 1.6%, P = .688). TIMI major bleeding was more common with enoxaparin (3.7% vs 2.5% with UFH, P = .028). Transfusions were more frequent with enoxaparin than with UFH (6.8% vs 5.4%, P = .047). TIMI major bleeding increased with crossover from enoxaparin to UFH (from 3.7% to 7.8%) and from UFH to enoxaparin (from 2.5% to 8.6%). Statistical adjustment to model reasons for crossover did not affect the overall safety and efficacy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients undergoing early percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome, enoxaparin avoids the need for monitoring and achieves similar effectiveness to UFH but is associated with more bleeding.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2006

The role of oral antiplatelet agents in atherothrombotic disease.

Atherothrombosis involves the mutually interactive dual mechanistic processes of atherosclerotic plaque progression and thrombus formation. In the setting of acute plaque rupture, resultant thrombus formation precipitates acute ischemic events such as acute coronary syndromes (ACS), stroke, and transient ischemic attack. Peripheral arterial disease is also a manifestation of atherothrombotic disease, and occurs both acutely and as a result of underlying disease progression. Atherothrombotic disease is highly prevalent and imposes a substantial burden on the community. For example, coronary artery disease was the single greatest cause of mortality among men and women in the US and accounted for an estimated US dollars 142.1 billion in health costs in 2005. Activated platelets are the prime mediators of arterial thrombus formation. This review discusses the evidence supporting the use of oral antiplatelet agents with other risk prevention strategies in the long-term secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease. The most widely used oral antiplatelet agent is aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), and both aspirin and clopidogrel have proven roles in the management of atherothrombotic disease. Clopidogrel should also be used in combination with aspirin in patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Recent data suggest that clopidogrel may have a significant role, with or without fibrinolytic therapy, in the immediate management of ST-segment elevation ACS.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2006

Strategies for optimizing outcomes in the NSTE-ACS patient The CATH (cardiac catheterization and antithrombotic therapy in the hospital) Clinical Consensus Panel Report.

This paper provides a comprehensive up-to-date review of the medical and invasive management of patients with non- ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). The authors have summarized findings from key clinical trials published recent years that contribute to clinicians' understanding of how best to optimize therapy. The goals for the management of NSTE-ACS are rapid and accurate risk stratification, appropriate and institution-specific triage to interventional versus medical strategies and optimal pharmacologic therapy--all of which provide for a smooth and seamless transition of care between the emergency department and the cardiology service. High-risk features or absolute treatment trigger criteria that support more aggressive medical therapy (i.e., addition of small-molecule GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor to a core regimen of aspirin, enoxaparin, and in most cases, clopidogrel) and/or that would direct clinicians toward percutaneous, mechanical/interventional strategies as the preferred modality include, but are not limited to, the presence of one or more of the following: (1) elevated cardiac markers (troponin and/or CK-MB); (2) elevated levels of inflammatory markers (particularly CRP > 3 microg/dl); (3) age > 65 years; (4) presence of ST-T wave changes; (5) TIMI Risk Score greater than or equal to 4; (6) diabetes; and/or (7) clinical instability in the setting of suspected NSTE-ACS. Specific clinical, ECG and/or biochemical trigger points modulate the aggressiveness of both the medical therapy and the propensity to perform early angiography with or without subsequent revascularization in patients with NSTE-ACS. Although additional refinements and changes in ACS management are still to come, evidence-based strategies suggest that prompt mechanical revascularization is associated with the best possible clinical outcomes, particularly for patients with high-risk features and in whom benefits of adjunctive, pharmacoinvasive antithrombotic therapies can be consolidated. Patient transfer for cardiac catheterization/percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is strongly recommended in patients who manifest high-risk features and/or aggressive treatment trigger criteria, so that this high-risk subgroup may receive definitive, interventional and/or cardiology-directed specialty care at appropriate sites of care. When available, interventional management is preferred in these patients. The importance of safe and effective anticoagulation in the spectrum of management strategies has been confirmed, and the evidence in support of enoxaparin and other antithrombotic agents has been reviewed. Dosing recommendations for enoxaparin use in the setting of PCI have been issued by the CATH Panel and have been summarized in this consensus report. Similar recommendations have been presented for the use of oral antiplatelet agents and GP IIb/IIIa antagonists. The addition of statins, ACE-inhibitors and beta-blockers is also stressed as part of a comprehensive secondary cardioprotective strategy for patients with coronary heart disease.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

High-risk patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin: outcomes at 6 months and 1 year in the SYNERGY trial.

CONTEXT: The SYNERGY trial comparing enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) showed that enoxaparin was not inferior to unfractionated heparin in reducing death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate continued risk in this patient cohort through 6-month and 1-year follow-up. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Overall, 9978 patients were randomized from August 2001 through December 2003 in 487 hospitals in 12 countries. Patients were followed up for 6 months and for 1 year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Six-month outcomes were death, nonfatal MI, revascularization procedures, stroke, and site-investigator-reported need for rehospitalization; 1-year outcome was all-cause death. RESULTS: Six-month and 1-year follow-up data were available for 9957 (99.8%) and 9608 (96.3%) of 9978 patients, respectively; 541 patients (5.4%) had died at 6 months and 739 (7.4%) at 1 year. Death or nonfatal MI at 6 months occurred in 872 patients receiving enoxaparin (17.6%) vs 884 receiving unfractionated heparin (17.8%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.07; P = .65). In the subgroup of patients receiving consistent therapy, ie, only enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin during the index hospitalization (n = 6138), a reduction in death or nonfatal MI with enoxaparin was maintained at 180 days (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95; P = .006). Rehospitalization within 180 days occurred in 858 patients receiving enoxaparin (17.9%) and 911 receiving unfractionated heparin (19.0%) (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03; P = .17). One-year all-cause death rates were similar in the 2 treatment groups (380/4974 [7.6%] for enoxaparin vs 359/4948 [7.3%] for unfractionated heparin; HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92-1.22; P = .44). One-year death rates in patients receiving consistent therapy were also similar (251/3386 [7.4%] for enoxaparin vs 213/2720 [7.8%] for unfractionated heparin; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.79-1.14; P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: In the SYNERGY trial, patients continued to experience adverse cardiac events through long-term follow-up. The effect of enoxaparin on death or MI compared with that of unfractionated heparin at 6 months was similar to that observed at 30 days in the overall trial and in the consistent-therapy group. One-year death rates were also similar in both groups. High-risk patients with ACS remain susceptible to continued cardiac events despite aggressive therapies.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00043784.

Enoxaparin↗
PubMed2005

Utilization of catheterization and revascularization procedures in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome over the last decade.

The degree to which catheterization and revascularization procedures are utilized in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) during hospitalization has broad implications with respect to initial pharmacotherapeutic decisions (upfront therapies), treatment and hospital transfer protocols, guideline recommendations, and allocation of training, material, and financial resources. Analysis of data from multiple trials and registries of patients with NSTE-ACS has the potential to assess more broadly utilization of invasive and revascularization procedures and provide a wide angle or bird's-eye view of the management of such patients, complementing the data obtained from any one trial or registry. We therefore undertook a systematic overview of all large trials and registries of patients with NSTE-ACS conducted over the last decade that were deemed appropriate to provide information on catheterization and revascularization procedures. Although not unexpectedly the percentage of patients with NSTE-ACS managed with cardiac catheterization, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass grafting varies in different clinical trials and registries, general findings and trends were still discernable from these studies. During the initial treatment period, the majority of patients were ultimately treated with medical therapy alone (e.g., without revascularization). The percentage of those NSTE-ACS patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization who were then managed with PCI increased over the last decade and now stands at approximately 50%. Of NSTE-ACS patients who undergo revascularization, the percentage of those patients who are revascularized via PCI similarly increased, and PCI is currently the revascularization procedure utilized in approximately three-fourths of patients undergoing revascularization. The percentages of patients undergoing invasive and revascularization procedures were consistently higher in the U.S. cohorts of study subjects when compared to non-U.S. cohorts of study subjects.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

A perspective on trials comparing enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in the treatment of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Non-ST-elevation (NSTE) acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a serious, acute illness characterized by a high rate of death and morbid events, and antithrombin therapy is integral to its management. Contemporary guidelines from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association call for use of low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH). METHODS: A systematic overview of six randomized, controlled trials comparing enoxaparin to UFH in the treatment of NSTE ACS was performed using a random-effects empirical Bayes model. Efficacy end points included the incidence of death or the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. Safety end points included major bleeding and transfusion at 7 days. RESULTS: For the aggregate of 21,946 patients, the incidence of the composite of death and MI at 30 days was lower in enoxaparin-treated patients (10.1% vs 11.0% for UFH, OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99, number need to treat 107). For the 9,835 patients in these trials who received no prerandomization antithrombin therapy, the composite of death and MI at 30 days occurred in 8.0% and 9.4% of enoxaparin- and UFH-treated patients, respectively (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70-0.94, number need to treat 94). There was no significant difference in the incidence of death at 30 days in either population. A nonsignificant trend toward higher rates of major bleeding was seen at 7 days for enoxaparin-treated patients, in both the overall safety population and the population of patients who did not receive antithrombin treatment before randomization, but there was no difference in blood transfusions. CONCLUSION: In a systematic overview of six randomized, controlled trials comparing enoxaparin to UFH in the treatment of NSTE ACS in approximately 22,000 patients, the use of enoxaparin rather than UFH was associated with a modest reduction in the incidence of the composite of death and MI at 30 days without a significant increase in the rate of major bleeding or transfusion at 7 days.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Exploring the role of enoxaparin in the management of high-risk patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: the SYNERGY trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS), enoxaparin has been shown to be superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) and is associated with a reduction in ischemic end points with nonsignificant increases in bleeding. However, the critical trials comparing enoxaparin with UFH were conducted before the widespread use of early invasive management and the availability of clopidogrel and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists. METHODS: SYNERGY was an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial that compared enoxaparin with UFH in high-risk NSTE ACS patients managed with an early invasive strategy. For enrollment, 2 out of 3 high-risk features were required: age > or =60 years, elevated cardiac biomarkers, or ST-segment changes. The primary efficacy end point was death/myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. The primary safety end point was inhospital major bleeding or stroke through 30 days. RESULTS: The incidence of death/MI at 30 days was 14.0% in the enoxaparin group and 14.5% in the UFH group (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.06), demonstrating noninferiority of enoxaparin relative to UFH. Enoxaparin was associated with a small but significant excess of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding, but there was no statistically significant increase in Global Utilization of Streptokinase and t-PA for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) severe bleeding or the rate of transfusion. There was no difference in complications of percutaneous coronary intervention. Interpretation of trial results was complicated by widespread use of enoxaparin or UFH before randomization, and by postrandomization crossover to the nonrandomized agent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NSTE ACS, including high-risk patients proceeding rapidly to catheterization, enoxaparin is an effective and safe alternative to UFH.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

In-hospital mortality associated with the use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation.

We analyzed in-hospital mortality for patients treated with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation from the Benchmark Counterpulsation Outcomes Registry (n = 25,136). In-hospital mortality was higher in patients who received only medical interventions (32.5%) than in those who underwent percutaneous (18.8%) and surgical (19.2%) interventions, and was greatest in the first days after hospital admission for all 3 intervention types. Therefore, diagnostic evaluation and treatment decisions should be made as early as possible, and physicians should be aware of associated risk factors in making choices for patients.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed with an intended early invasive strategy: primary results of the SYNERGY randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Enoxaparin has demonstrated advantages over unfractionated heparin in low- to moderate-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) treated with a conservative strategy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of patients treated with enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin and to define the role of enoxaparin in patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS at high risk for ischemic cardiac complications managed with an early invasive approach. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors (SYNERGY) trial was a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter, international trial conducted between August 2001 and December 2003. A total of 10 027 high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS to be treated with an intended early invasive strategy were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Subcutaneous enoxaparin (n = 4993) or intravenous unfractionated heparin (n = 4985) was to be administered immediately after enrollment and continued until the patient required no further anticoagulation, as judged by the treating physician. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary efficacy outcome was the composite clinical end point of all-cause death or nonfatal myocardial infarction during the first 30 days after randomization. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding or stroke. RESULTS: The primary end point occurred in 14.0% (696/4993) of patients assigned to enoxaparin and 14.5% (722/4985) of patients assigned to unfractionated heparin (odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-1.06). No differences in ischemic events during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were observed between enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin groups, respectively, including similar rates of abrupt closure (31/2321 [1.3%] vs 40/2364 [1.7%]), threatened abrupt closure (25/2321 [1.1%] vs 24/2363 [1.0%]), unsuccessful PCI (81/2281 [3.6%] vs 79/2328 [3.4%]), or emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery (6/2323 [0.3%] vs 8/2363 [0.3%]). More bleeding was observed with enoxaparin, with a statistically significant increase in TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) major bleeding (9.1% vs 7.6%, P =.008) but nonsignificant excess in GUSTO (Global Utilization of Streptokinase and t-PA for Occluded Arteries) severe bleeding (2.7% vs 2.2%, P =.08) and transfusions (17.0% vs 16.0%, P =.16). CONCLUSIONS: Enoxaparin was not superior to unfractionated heparin but was noninferior for the treatment of high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS. Enoxaparin is a safe and effective alternative to unfractionated heparin and the advantages of convenience should be balanced with the modest excess of major bleeding.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Efficacy and bleeding complications among patients randomized to enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin for antithrombin therapy in non-ST-Segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a systematic overview.

CONTEXT: Antithrombin therapy has become a guidelines-recommended standard of care in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS), but recent trials comparing use of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in ACS have yielded less robust efficacy and safety results than have earlier trials of these antithrombin therapies. OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the end points of all-cause death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), transfusion, and major bleeding observed in the 6 randomized controlled trials comparing enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in treatment of ACS. DATA SOURCES: The primary data sets for ESSENCE, A to Z, and SYNERGY were available at the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Baseline characteristics and event frequencies for TIMI 11B, ACUTE II, and INTERACT were provided by the principal investigator of each study. STUDY SELECTION: All 6 randomized controlled trials comparing enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in non-ST-segment elevation ACS were selected for analysis. DATA EXTRACTION: Efficacy and safety end points were extracted from the overall trial populations and the subpopulation receiving no antithrombin therapy prior to randomization. DATA SYNTHESIS: Systematic evaluation of the outcomes for 21 946 patients was performed using a random-effects empirical Bayes model. No significant difference was found in death at 30 days for enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin (3.0% vs 3.0%; odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.17). A statistically significant reduction in the combined end point of death or nonfatal MI at 30 days was observed for enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in the overall trial populations (10.1% vs 11.0%; OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99; number needed to treat, 107). A statistically significant reduction in the combined end point of death or MI at 30 days was also observed for enoxaparin in the populations receiving no prerandomization antithrombin therapy (8.0% vs 9.4%; OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.94; number needed to treat, 72). No significant difference was found in blood transfusion (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89-1.14) or major bleeding (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.83-1.30) at 7 days after randomization in the overall safety population or in the population of patients receiving no prerandomization antithrombin therapy. CONCLUSION: In a systematic overview of approximately 22 000 patients across the spectrum of ACS, enoxaparin is more effective than unfractionated heparin in preventing the combined end point of death or MI.

Angina Pectoris↗