Coronariografía urgente en los pacientes con parada cardiaca extrahospitalaria sin elevación del segmento ST. Ensayo clínico COUPE

Introduction and objectivesThe role of emergency coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in patients without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear. We aimed to assess whether emergency CAG and PCI would improve survival with good neurological outcome in this population.MethodsIn this multicenter, randomized, open-label, investigator-initiated clinical trial, we randomly assigned 69 survivors of OHCA without STEMI to undergo immediate CAG or deferred CAG. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of in-hospital survival free of severe dependence. The safety endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events including death, reinfarction, bleeding, and ventricular arrhythmias.ResultsA total of 66 patients were included in the primary analysis (95.7%). In-hospital survival was 62.5% in the immediate CAG group and 58.8% in the delayed CAG group (HR, 0.96; 95%CI, 0.45-2.09; P = .93). In-hospital survival free of severe dependence was 59.4% in the immediate CAG group and 52.9% in the delayed CAG group (HR, 1.29; 95%CI, 0.60-2.73; P = .4986). No differences were found in the secondary endpoints except for the incidence of acute kidney failure, which was more frequent in the immediate CAG group (15.6% vs 0%, P = .002) and infections, which were higher in the delayed CAG group (46.9% vs 73.5%, P = .003).ConclusionsIn this underpowered randomized trial involving patients resuscitated after OHCA without STEMI, immediate CAG provided no benefit in terms of survival without neurological impairment compared with delayed CAG.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02641626Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en     

Determinantes e impacto pronóstico de la insuficiencia cardiaca y la fracción de eyección del ventrículo izquierdo en el síndrome coronario agudo

Introduction and objectives

Contemporary data on the incidence and prognosis of heart failure (HF) and the influence of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the setting of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are scant. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between LVEF and HF with long-term prognosis in a cohort of patients with ACS.

La simplificación del proceso de diagnóstico de la hepatitis C crónica es una estrategia coste-efectiva

BackgroundThe cascade of care of the hepatitis C are complex. The diagnosis of active infection in the same serum sample would simplify the process establishing a rapid access for patients to treatment. Our objective was to estimate the impact on healthcare and economic outcomes of the diagnosis of chronic infection in one-step diagnosis compared to standard diagnosis in Andalusia (8.39 million people).MethodsA decision tree was developed to estimate the referral of patients with chronic infection, loss of follow-up, access to treatment and costs of the diagnosis of the infection, for both processes. The unit costs (€, 2018) of the health resources (medical visits, antibodies, viral load and genotype), without considering the pharmacological cost, were obtained form public sources in Andalusia.ResultsOf the total estimated population (269,526 patients), 1,389 patients would be referred to the specialised care in the one-step diagnosis and 1,063 in de standard diagnosis, being treated 1,320 and 1,009, respectively. In one-step diagnosis, no negative viral loud patient would be referred to specialist versus 540 with standard diagnosis. One-step diagnosis would generate a cost saving of €184,928 versus standard diagnosis (€15,671,493 vs €15,856,421). When compared one-step diagnosis to standard diagnosis, the savings per patient with positive viral load referred to specialist would be €3,634 (€11,279 vs €14,923).ConclusionThe one-step diagnosis will achieve an increase in diagnosed patients, will increase the access of chronic patient to treatment and will generate cost savings, demonstrating its efficiency in the system in Andalusia.     

Validación pronóstica según los criterios de la GesEPOC 2017

IntroductionThe Spanish COPD guidelines (GesEPOC) have been recently modified. The aim of this study is to assess this revision and evaluate the prognosis of patients according to the new classification of severity.MethodsA total of 700 COPD patients (83.9% men) were prospectively followed up for a mean period of 5 years in tertiary hospitals in Spain and the USA. Anthropometric data, lung function tests, dyspnea (according to the mMRC scale), BODE and Charlson index were collected. We calculated mortality at 5 years following the risk criteria proposed by the new GesEPOC.ResultsMean age was 66 ± 9.6 years and mean FEV₁% was 59.7 ± 20.2. The proportion of patients in the low-risk group was 40.43%. Patients in the high-risk group had a significantly higher BODE index than those in the low-risk group (2.92 ± 0,66 vs. 0.52 ± 1.91, p < 0.001), while the Charlson index score was similar in both groups. Mortality at 60 months was significantly higher in the high-risk group (31.7% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). Dyspnea and FEV₁% were also independent predictors of mortality (p < 0.001), and neither was inferior to the risk classification proposed by GesEPOC.ConclusionsThe new severity index proposed by GesEPOC accurately predicts 5-year mortality. However, dyspnea and FEV₁% have the same strength in predicting mortality.