Search

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Fundación Alfonso Martín Escudero The response of the right ventricle (RV) to the hemodynamic effects of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is unpredictable. We hypothesized if presence of uni- or bi-ventricular failure before implantation and cannulation strategy may influence. We assessed RV performance during VA-ECMO support and identify RV-related predictors of weaning. Methods. Changes of RV size and function during VA-ECMO by echocardiography were retrospectively analyzed in 87 patients. Predictors of weaning were evaluated by logistic regression. Results. RV echocardiographic parameters did not vary significantly during VA-ECMO, neither after stratification by cannulation type or presence of isolated or biventriular failure. Succesful weaning was conditioned by absence of RV dysfunction before implantation (OR 14.7,95%CI 13.3-140.3;p = 0.025) or in the last day of support (OR 9.5; 95%CI 1.6-54;p = 0.011) and was favored by a total or partial recovery of RV function during the assistance (OR 6.2; 95%CI 1.7-22.4;p = 0.005). RV improvement was more often observed in patients with acute RV failure, while VA-ECMO configuration had no effect. Conclusions. Preservation or improvement of RV function during VA-ECMO support is essential for weaning. RV echocardiographic performance does not change significantly during VA-ECMO and is not influenced by cannulation type or presence of uni- or bi-ventricular failure before implantation. Echo parameters evolution during VA-ECMOPre-ECMO< 24h on ECMO> 24h on ECMOpNn = 68n = 68n = 63LV diastolic diameter, mm (mean ± SD)53.34 ± 15.5954.86 ± 13.8956.18 ± 14.620.317LV systolic diameter, mm45.28 ± 11.6745.17 ± 14.5846.07 ± 15.590.963LVEF, n (%)20 (10-38.75)17.5 (10-30)25 (10-40)0.102RV basal diameter, mm (mean ± SD)41.05 ± 9.7938.92± 9.1740.05 ± 9.560.484RV systolic disfunction, n (%)65 (95.6)65 (95.5)43 (68.2)0.073Tricuspid regurgitation, n (%)50 (73.4)37 (54.3)49 (77.8)0.146Pulmonary systolic pressure, mmHg (mean ± SD)41.54 ± 24.1339.09 ± 20.2445.29 ± 25.730.783Aortic regurgitation, n (%)47 (69.1)39 (57.4)35 (55.5)0.775Mitral regurgitation, n (%)64 (94.1)48 (70.5)44 (69.8)0.591Dd diastolic diameter; EF: ejection fraction; LV: left ventricle; LVOT: left ventricle outflow tract; RV: right ventricle; RVOT: right ventricle outflow tract; VTI: velocity time integralAbstract Figure. Right ventricular function predictors

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus who have not had a myocardial infarction or stroke are at high risk for cardiovascular events. Whether adding ticagrelor to aspirin improves outcomes in this population is unclear. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who were 50 years of age or older and who had stable coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus to receive either ticagrelor plus aspirin or placebo plus aspirin. Patients with previous myocardial infarction or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding as defined by the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 19,220 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Permanent treatment discontinuation was more frequent with ticagrelor than placebo (34.5% vs. 25.4%). The incidence of ischemic cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) was lower in the ticagrelor group than in the placebo group (7.7% vs. 8.5%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 0.99; P = 0.04), whereas the incidence of TIMI major bleeding was higher (2.2% vs. 1.0%; hazard ratio, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.82 to 2.94; P

Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) patients are increasingly older, and common risk scores include chronological age, but do not consider chronic comorbidity or biological age. Frailty status reflects these variables and may be independently correlated with prognosis in this setting. Objective: This study investigated the impact of frailty on the prognosis of elderly patients admitted due to MI. Methods: This prospective and observational study included patients ≥75 years admitted to three tertiary hospitals in Spain due to MI. Frailty assessment was performed at admission using the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe Frailty Index (SHARE-FI) tool. The primary endpoint was the composite of death or non-fatal reinfarction during a follow-up of 1 year. Overall mortality, reinfarction, the composite of death, reinfarction and stroke, major bleeding, and readmission rates were also explored. Results: A total of 285 patients were enrolled. Frail patients (109, 38.2%) were older, with a higher score in the Charlson Comorbidity Index and with a higher risk score addressed in the GRACE and CRUSADE indexes. On multivariate analysis including GRACE, CRUSADE, maximum creatinine level, culprit lesion revascularization, complete revascularization, and dual antiplatelet therapy at discharge, frailty was an independent predictor of the composite of death and reinfarction (2.81, 95% CI 1.16–6.78) and overall mortality (3.07, 95% CI 1.35–6.98). Conclusion: Frailty is an independent prognostic marker of the composite of mortality and reinfarction and of overall mortality in patients aged ≥75 years admitted due to MI.