PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

William F McIntyre

Publications and source records attributed to William F McIntyre.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Colchicine to prevent cardiovascular events in thoracic surgery patients with or without coronary artery disease: a secondary analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This exploratory post hoc secondary analysis of the Colchicine for the Prevention of Perioperative Atrial Fibrillation (COP-AF) randomised controlled trial evaluated the association between coronary artery disease (CAD) and postoperative ischaemic outcomes after non-cardiac thoracic surgery and assessed whether colchicine had differential effects by CAD status. METHODS: Patients were randomised to colchicine 0.5&#x2009;mg or placebo two times per day for 10 days. Follow-up was 14 days. The primary outcome was myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS). A key secondary outcome was the composite of death, MINS and stroke. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between CAD and outcomes, with interaction terms to explore whether colchicine had differential effects by CAD status. RESULTS: Of 3209 patients enrolled, 331 (10.3%) had CAD. MINS occurred in 29.3% (n=97) and 18.2% (n=523) of patients with and without CAD, adjusted HR (aHR) 1.53 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.92; p<0.001). For colchicine versus placebo, the HR for MINS was 0.82 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.22) in CAD versus 0.91 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.08) in non-CAD patients (p for interaction=0.61). Death, stroke or MINS occurred in 30.2% (n=100) vs 18.6% (n=535), respectively (aHR 1.53, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; p<0.001). Colchicine HRs were 0.77 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.14)&#x2009;vs 0.91 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.07; p for interaction=0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CAD undergoing thoracic surgery had a higher risk of MINS and other ischaemic outcomes than non-CAD patients. There was no evidence that the effect of colchicine differed between patients with and without CAD; however, these analyses were limited by sample size and do not exclude modest differences between subgroups.

Humans

Reliability of resting heart rate measurements in atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Heart rate (HR) control in atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly guided by resting HR measurements, usually with 12&#x2011;lead ECG or in-office pulse palpation. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the reliability of resting HR measurements in AF patients with long-term ambulatory ECG and activity monitoring. METHODS: We included patients who had recorded a full-disclosure ambulatory ECG with a mobile cardiac telemetry device equipped with an accelerometer (PocketECG, MEDICALgorithmics, Poland), with at least 95% AF. Resting HR samples (&#x2264;20 per individual/day) were collected as 10-s daytime (8&#xa0;am to 8&#xa0;pm) measurements after &#x2265;10&#xa0;min of rest. These samples were compared to each individual's mean daytime resting HR. RESULTS: In 832 patients (median age 77 (interquartile range (IQR) 69-83) years, 42% women) with a median registration duration of 13&#xa0;days (IQR 7-22), the population mean daytime resting HR was 85 (&#xb1;15) beats per minute (bpm). A single resting HR differed from the mean daytime resting HR by a mean of &#xb1;10.4% (IQR 3.6-14.4%). When the mean daytime resting HR was &#x2265;110&#xa0;bpm, 29% of resting HR samples were&#xa0;<&#xa0;110&#xa0;bpm, and when the mean daytime resting HR was 80-109&#xa0;bpm,11% of samples were&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;110&#xa0;bpm. Resting HR measurement variability decreased to 5.3% (IQR 1.9-7.5%) when four resting HR samples were averaged. CONCLUSION: In patients with AF, a single resting HR measurement often differs substantially from the mean daytime resting HR. When a precise measurement is clinically relevant, repeated resting HR sampling or ambulatory monitoring can address this measurement imprecision.

Humans