Search

Lesion morphology poorly predicts functional significance of intermediate coronary artery stenosis. The aim of this study was to determine whether a coronary artery-based myocardial segmentation method that quantifies subtended myocardium can improve the diagnostic accuracy of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-derived parameters for detecting ischemia-producing lesions. Coronary computed tomography angiography, IVUS, and fractional flow reserve (FFR) data were analyzed in 101 non-left main lesions (20% to 80% angiographic stenosis). Using the coronary artery-based myocardial segmentation method, total left ventricular myocardial volume (Vtotal), myocardial volume subtended by the stenotic coronary segment (Vsub), and Vratio (the ratio of the Vsub to the Vtotal) were assessed. Both Vsub >30.7 cm(3) and Vratio >25.4% were determinants of FFR ≤0.75 (area under the curve = 0.696 and 0.744). Overall, an IVUS-measured minimum lumen area (IVUS-MLA) ≤2.83 mm(2) predicted FFR ≤0.75 with a sensitivity 88% and specificity 73%. Among lesions with IVUS-MLA ≤2.83 mm(2) and FFR >0.75, 89% showed Vsub <30.7 cm(3). In 50 lesions with Vsub >30.7 cm(3), an IVUS-MLA ≤2.85 mm(2) predicted FFR ≤0.75 with sensitivity 85%, specificity 92%, positive predictive value 92%, and negative predictive value 85%. Conversely, in 51 lesions with a Vsub ≤30.7 cm(3), IVUS-MLA ≤2.67 mm(2) showed sensitivity 100%, specificity 69%, positive predictive value 38%, and negative predictive value 100% for predicting FFR ≤0.75. Body surface area, reference lumen diameter, and vessel area had modest correlations with Vsub. In those lesion subsets, IVUS-MLA ≈2.8 mm(2) accurately predicted an FFR ≤0.75, whereas the clinical relevance of assessing and treating lesions with a smaller myocardial territory may be limited (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT1696006). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Donepezil 23 mg is considered for Alzheimer's disease (AD) to optimize cognitive benefits; however, increased adverse events (AEs) can negatively influence drug adherence. We investigated whether body weight (BW) differs based on the presence of AEs, and which baseline factors were relevant to the safety of high-dose donepezil. Methods: This study was a post hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized trial between 2014 and 2016. We included patients with moderate to severe AD treated with 10 mg/day of donepezil, and the daily dose was escalated to 23 mg with/without dose titration. Dose titration indicates 15 mg/day of donepezil before escalation or 10 mg and 23 mg/day on alternate days before escalation during the first 4 weeks. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on occurrence of AEs of special interest (AESIs) to compare baseline characteristics. We also assessed relationships between BW and AESIs. Results: Among the 160 participants in the safety population, the baseline BWs differed between the AESI (+) (n = 67) and AESI (−) (n = 93) groups. Baseline BW was inversely correlated with the occurrence of AESIs (p = 0.020), and this relationship was prominent in the no-dose titration group (p = 0.009) but absent in the dose-titration groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: BW is the most important factor that correlated with cholinergic AEs. Hence, stepwise dose titration should be considered, particularly in patients with low BW, to minimize the inverse relationship between BW and the occurrence of AEs ("Clinicaltrials.gov" No. NCT02550665 registered on September 15, 2015). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: We conducted this meta-analysis about the effects of Souvenaid on cognition and functional abilities, with the hypothesis that Souvenaid may have beneficial effects in certain groups and the goal of finding the outcome measures, disease states, and so on, applicable for further clinical trials.Methods and Study Design: We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library. Only double- blind randomized controlled trials were included. Outcome measurements were cognition, clinical global change, functional ability, and adverse events. The duration of treatment was not restricted, but trials performed in patients who did not have Alzheimer's disease (AD) were excluded.Results: This review using meta-analyses of 4 clinical trials showed that Souvenaid had no significant effects on cognition as measured by ADAS-Cog (MD=0.08, 95% CI=-0.71-0.88) and the neuropsychological test battery total scores (MD=0.05, 95% CI=-0,02- 0.12), on global clinical function as measured by CDR-SB (MD=-0.21, 95% CI=-0.47-0.06), or on functional ability as measured by ADCS-ADL (MD=0.36, 95% CI=-0.54-1.25). There were no differences in any adverse events (OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.63-1.12) or in serious adverse events (OR=0.95, 95% CI=0.66-1.36). However, Souvenaid may benefit the domains of cognition that are affected by AD (attention, memory, and executive function), and it may have greater potential for benefits earlier rather than later in the disease.Conclusions: The results of current clinical trials do not suggest that Souvenaid has any beneficial effects on cognition, functional ability, or global clinical change. Further studies with outcome measures suitable in patients with early stages of AD will be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous randomised trials have shown an overwhelming benefit of mechanical thrombectomy for treating patients with stroke caused by large vessel occlusion of the anterior circulation. Whether endovascular treatment is beneficial for vertebrobasilar artery occlusion remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment of acute strokes due to vertebrobasilar artery occlusion.Methods: We did a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial, with blinded outcome assessment of thrombectomy in patients presenting within 8 h of vertebrobasilar occlusion at 28 centres in China. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to endovascular therapy plus standard medical therapy (intervention group) or standard medical therapy alone (control group). The randomisation sequence was computer-generated and stratified by participating centres. Allocation concealment was implemented by use of sealed envelopes. The primary outcome was a modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 3 or lower (indicating ability to walk unassisted) at 90 days, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary safety outcome was mortality at 90 days. Secondary safety endpoints included the rates of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, device-related complications, and other severe adverse events. The BEST trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02441556.Findings: Between April 27, 2015, and Sept 27, 2017, we assessed 288 patients for eligibility. The trial was terminated early after 131 patients had been randomly assigned (66 patients to the intervention group and 65 to the control group) because of high crossover rate and poor recruitment. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants with mRS 0-3 at 90 days according to treatment (28 [42%] of 66 patients in the intervention group vs 21 [32%] of 65 in the control group; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·74, 95% CI 0·81-3·74). Secondary prespecified analyses of the primary outcome, done to assess the effect of crossovers, showed higher rates of mRS 0-3 at 90 days in patients who actually received the intervention compared with those who received standard medical therapy alone in both per-protocol (28 [44%] of 63 patients with intervention vs 13 [25%] of 51 with standard therapy; adjusted OR 2·90, 95% CI 1·20-7·03) and as-treated (36 [47%] of 77 patients with intervention vs 13 [24%] of 54 with standard therapy; 3·02, 1·31-7·00) populations. The 90-day mortality was similar between groups (22 [33%] of 66 patients in the intervention vs 25 [38%] of 65 in the control group; p=0·54) despite a numerically higher prevalence of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the intervention group.Interpretation: There was no evidence of a difference in favourable outcomes of patients receiving endovascular therapy compared with those receiving standard medical therapy alone. Results might have been confounded by loss of equipoise over the course of the trial, resulting in poor adherence to the assigned study treatment and a reduced sample size due to the early termination of the study.Funding: Jiangsu Provincial Special Program of Medical Science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Effective treatments to alleviate depression in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been scarce.Objective: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in the treatment of depression in AD.Methods: In this 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with open-label, 12-week extension, AD subjects over 50 years of age, with depression defined by Olin's provisional diagnostic criteria, were enrolled. The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD), and other measures of depression and cognition were repeated.Results: 91 subjects were screened, and 84 were randomized into either the study group or placebo group (n = 42 for both groups). Twenty-four subjects (29%) were unable to finish the study, yielding a per protocol population of 60 subjects (study group: n = 27; placebo group: n = 33). At week 12, differences in measures of depression and cognition between the two groups were not statistically significant. However, exploratory analysis suggested that further research on a subset of subjects with 'definite major depression' (baseline CSDD score ≥18) is needed. The number of treatment-related adverse-events (AE) did not differ between groups (p = 0.83) and no serious treatment-related AE were observed.Conclusion: The use of escitalopram was well tolerated in depressive dementia patients. Future studies focusing on subjects with more severe levels of depression, and with more statistical power, will be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]