Search

AimsACE inhibition reduces mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, there are limited randomised data about the long-term survival benefits of ACE inhibition in this population.MethodsIn 1993, the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) study randomly allocated patients with AMI and clinical heart failure to ramipril or placebo. The duration of masked trial therapy in the UK cohort (603 patients, mean age=64.7 years, 455 male patients) was 12.4 and 13.4 months for ramipril (n=302) and placebo (n=301), respectively. We estimated life expectancy and extensions of life (difference in median survival times) according to duration of follow-up (range 0–29.6 years).ResultsBy 9 April 2019, death from all causes occurred in 266 (88.4%) patients in placebo arm and 275 (91.1%) patients in ramipril arm. The extension of life between ramipril and placebo groups was 14.5 months (95% CI 13.2 to 15.8). Ramipril increased life expectancy more for patients with than without diabetes (life expectancy difference 32.1 vs 5.0 months), previous AMI (20.1 vs 4.9 months), previous heart failure (19.5 vs 4.9 months), hypertension (16.6 vs 8.3 months), angina (16.2 vs 5.0 months) and age >65 years (11.3 vs 5.7 months). Given potential treatment switching, the true absolute treatment effect could be underestimated by 28%.ConclusionFor patients with clinically defined heart failure following AMI, ramipril results in a sustained survival benefit, and is associated with an extension of life of up to 14.5 months for, on average, 13 months treatment duration.

ObjectiveTo study the association of cardiac rehabilitation and physical activity with temporal changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI).MethodsEvaluation of the Methods and Management of Acute Coronary Events-3 is a nationwide longitudinal prospective cohort study of 4570 patients admitted with an AMI between 1 November 2011 and 17 September 2013. HRQoL was estimated using EuroQol 5-Dimension-3 Level Questionnaire at hospitalisation, 30 days, and 6 and 12 months following hospital discharge. The association of cardiac rehabilitation and self-reported physical activity on temporal changes in HRQoL was quantified using inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score and multilevel regression analyses.ResultsCardiac rehabilitation attendees had higher HRQoL scores than non-attendees at 30 days (mean EuroQol 5-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) scores: 71.0 (SD 16.8) vs 68.6 (SD 19.8)), 6 months (76.0 (SD 16.4) vs 70.2 (SD 19.0)) and 12 months (76.9 (SD 16.8) vs 70.4 (SD 20.4)). Attendees who were physically active ≥150 min/week had higher HRQoL scores compared with those who only attended cardiac rehabilitation at 30 days (mean EQ-VAS scores: 79.3 (SD 14.6) vs 70.2 (SD 17.0)), 6 months (82.2 (SD 13.9) vs 74.9 (SD 16.7)) and 12 months (84.1 (SD 12.1) vs 75.6 (SD 17.0)). Cardiac rehabilitation and self-reported physical activity of ≥150 min/week were each positively associated with temporal improvements in HRQoL (coefficient: 2.12 (95% CI 0.68 to 3.55) and 4.75 (95% CI 3.16 to 6.34), respectively).ConclusionsCardiac rehabilitation was independently associated with temporal improvements in HRQoL at up to 12 months following hospitalisation, with such changes further improved in patients who were physically active.

The renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) plays a central role in the pathophysiology of hypertension and vascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi's) suppress angiotensin II (ANG II) concentrations, whereas angiotensin II type 1 (AT1) receptor blockers (ARBs) block the binding of ANG II to AT1receptors. ACEi's and ARBs are both effective antihypertensive agents and produce similar risk reductions for stroke, a blood pressure-dependent phenomenon. ACEi's also reduce the risk for myocardial infarction (MI) and all-cause mortality in high-risk hypertensive patients as well as in people with diabetes, vascular disease and congestive heart failure. ARBs, in contrast, do not reduce the risk for MI or death in randomized clinical trials when assessed vs. placebo. Systematic reviews of ARBs that include meta-analyses or metaregression analyses confirm that ARBs lack the cardiovascular-protective effects of ACEi's.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Ischemic stroke (IS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) share several risk factors and each has a substantial heritability. We conducted a genome-wide analysis to evaluate the extent of shared genetic determination of the two diseases.

Aim: To investigate whether a hospital-specific opportunity-based composite score (OBCS) was associated with mortality in 136,392 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) using data from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) 2008–2009.Methods and results: For 199 hospitals a multidimensional hospital OBCS was calculated on the number of times that aspirin, thienopyridine, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi), statin, ß-blocker, and referral for cardiac rehabilitation was given to individual patients, divided by the overall number of opportunities that hospitals had to give that care. OBCS and its six components were compared using funnel plots. Associations between OBCS performance and 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality were quantified using mixed-effects regression analysis. Median hospital OBCS was 95.3% (range 75.8–100%). By OBCS, 24.1% of hospitals were below funnel plot 99.8% CI, compared to aspirin (11.1%), thienopyridine (15.1%), ß-blockers (14.7%), ACEi (19.1%), statins (12.1%), and cardiac rehabilitation (17.6%) on discharge. Mortality (95% CI) decreased with increasing hospital OBCS quartile at 30 days [Q1, 2.25% (2.07–2.43%) vs. Q4, 1.40% (1.25–1.56%)] and 6 months [Q1, 7.93% (7.61–8.25%) vs. Q4, 5.53% (5.22–5.83%)]. Hospital OBCS quartile was inversely associated with adjusted 30-day and 6-month mortality [OR (95% CI), 0.87 (0.80–0.94) and 0.92 (0.88–0.96), respectively] and persisted after adjustment for coronary artery catheterization [0.89 (0.82–0.96) and 0.95 (0.91–0.98), respectively].Conclusions: Multidimensional hospital OBCS in AMI survivors are high, discriminate hospital performance more readily than single performance indicators, and significantly inversely predict early and longer-term mortality.

High plasma HDL cholesterol is associated with reduced risk of myocardial infarction, but whether this association is causal is unclear. Exploiting the fact that genotypes are randomly assigned at meiosis, are independent of non-genetic confounding, and are unmodified by disease processes, mendelian randomisation can be used to test the hypothesis that the association of a plasma biomarker with disease is causal.

Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified several novel loci that reproducibly associate with coronary artery disease (CAD) andor myocardial infarction risk. However, known common CAD risk variants explain only 10 of the predicted genetic heritability of the disease, suggesting that important genetic signals remain to be discovered.

A sexual dimorphism exists in the incidence and prevalence of coronary artery disease—men are more commonly affected than are age-matched women. We explored the role of the Y chromosome in coronary artery disease in the context of this sexual inequity.

eQTL analyses are important to improve the understanding of genetic association results. We performed a genome-wide association and global gene expression study to identify functionally relevant variants affecting the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD).

We tested whether genetic factors distinctly contribute to either development of coronary atherosclerosis or, specifically, to myocardial infarction in existing coronary atherosclerosis.

Recent genome-wide association studies GWAS of myocardial infarction MI and other forms of coronary artery disease CAD have led to the discovery of at least 13 genetic loci. In addition to the effect size, power to detect associations is largely driven by sample size. Therefore, to maximize the chance of finding novel susceptibility loci for CAD and MI, the Coronary ARtery DIsease Genome-wide Replication And Meta-analysis CARDIoGRAM consortium was formed.

Phytosterols are plant-derived sterols that are taken up from food and can serve as biomarkers of cholesterol uptake. Serum levels are under tight genetic control. We used a genomic approach to study the molecular regulation of serum phytosterol levels and potential links to coronary artery disease CAD.

Pharmacogenetics aims to maximize benefits and minimize risks of drug treatment. Our objectives were to examine the influence of common variants of hepatic metabolism and transporter genes on the lipid-lowering response to statin therapy.

Partial left ventriculectomy (the Batista procedure) to achieve left ventricular volume reduction (LVVR) has been advocated as an alternative to cardiac transplantation in patients with end-stage dilated left ventricles. Here, we describe a new technique of LVVR that uses realignment of the papillary muscles, thus avoiding ventriculectomy, and report preliminary results. Eight patients (all male, mean age 49.3 [range 38 to 70] years) underwent LVVR between October 1998 and March 2000 as an adjunct to surgical coronary revascularization. Five were assessed with echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise testing before and after (mean follow-up time 267 [range 94 to 416] days) the operation. LVVR significantly improved left ventricular end-diastolic volume (254 ± 32 to 218 ± 36 mL, p= 0.03), left ventricular ejection fraction (20.14% ± 1.36% to 31.28% ± 2.32%, p= 0.007), and exercise duration (from 394 ± 88 to 611 ± 79 seconds, p= 0.03). A nonsignificant improvement in maximal oxygen consumption was also observed. This technique of LVVR is relatively simple to perform and is accomplished through a small apical cardiotomy. Preliminary results show an encouraging functional improvement following surgery. Future controlled studies are required to assess this novel technique further.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are now established drugs in the treatment of hypertension and heart failure. However, their use in patients after a myocardial infarction has occurred remains controversial. The major clinical question regarding ACE inhibitors is whether they should be given to all patients immediately after thrombolysis or whether their use should be restricted to a particular subgroup. This question has now been addressed in several large-scale trials of mortality after myocardial infarction, and no important new information seems likely to emerge on the issue. Clinicians must therefore decide what their practice will be on the basis of data that are currently available. The authors of the recently published Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell' Infarcto Miocardico (GISSI-3) and Fourth International Study of Infarct Survival (ISIS-4) mega-trials advocate a policy of widespread and early use of ACE inhibitors in all patients after myocardial infarction occurs. However, the small mortality benefit observed from use of ACE inhibitors in these studies lacks certainty and may prove difficult to reproduce in the general population of patients who have had an infarct outside the setting of a trial. Although patients were essentially not selected apart from the exclusion of those with marked hypotension, the low 6-month and 1-year mortality figures indicate “selection” compared with the typical population of patients who have had a myocardial infarction. Furthermore, a significant long-term mortality benefit was not observed with the short-term (4- to 6-week) use of ACE inhibitors in these trials. In contrast, in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE), Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE), and Trandopril Cardiac Evaluation (TRACE) trials, where evidence of impairment of ventricular function was used to select patients, both a marked and certain benefit regarding mortality was apparent from long-term prescription of these drugs. Importantly, the marked benefit observed in these selected patients may have been “diluted out” in the larger scale trials of unselected patients where the majority may have gained little and some may have been harmed by treatment or its withdrawal. In most of the large mortality trials the rationale for use of ACE inhibitors after myocardial infarction was stated to be their likely beneficial effect on “remodeling” of the heart after “infarct expansion.” Because adverse remodeling occurs in only a proportion of patients after a heart attack, the benefits of ACE inhibitor therapy might be predicted to be largely limited to this group, which would favor a selective policy. However, strong claims have been made that ACE inhibitors have other important actions, including prevention of myocardial infarction. If this is confirmed in a number of ongoing large-scale trials, then an even more widespread use of these agents can be expected.

A number of major studies have examined the impact of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease. However, in these studies, selection of patients, choice of agent and timing of treatment after myocardial infarction have differed. In the Second Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS II), all patients, unless hypotensive, were treated immediately after thrombolysis with placebo or intravenous enalaprilat followed by oral therapy. In contrast, in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) study, patients were selected with a reduced radionuclide ejection fraction and without overt ongoing ischemia. Despite these different approaches, both studies were based on the rationale that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition would beneficially affect infarct expansion and subsequent remodeling. The SAVE study reported a significant reduction in mortality rate (19% risk reduction, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3% to 32%) over an average follow-up period of 42 months, but with no observable impact on mortality rate until almost 1 year into treatment. The CONSENSUS II trial closed prematurely, with no benefit (a 10% increase in risk, 95% CI 7% reduction to 29% increase) apparent from enalapril after 6 months of follow-up. The recently reported but unpublished findings of Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico (GISSI-3) and the Fourth International Study of Infarct Survival (ISIS-4) indicate a small benefit from early (within 24 h) short-term (4 to 6 weeks) treatment of all patients, unless hypotensive, after a myocardial infarction. In contrast, the Acute Infarction Ramipril Efficacy (AIRE) study demonstrated a marked reduction in mortality rate (27% risk reduction, 95% CI 11% to 40%) when the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor ramipril was given to patients manifesting some clinical evidence of heart failure, even if transient, 3 to 10 days after myocardial infarction for an average period of 15 months. Extrapolation from the findings of the AIRE study and from subgroup analyses of GISSI-3 and ISIS-4 indicate that patients manifesting clinical evidence of heart failure after myocardial infarction derive most of the benefit to be gained from the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Appropriate selection of patients and careful timing of treatment after myocardial infarction to allow patients to achieve clinical stability will maximize potential benefit against potential harm from these effective agents.

Volunteers have undergone radio frequency hyperthermia in a magnetic resonance (MR) imaging system to investigate which of several possible MR parameters would be most convenient and sensitive to use to observe in vivo temperature changes. Measurements were made for T1, T2, and perfusion and diffusion variations, although the number of sequences needed at each temperature meant that the number of data points obtainable was limited. However, in the temperature range studied (around 28–42°C), changes in both T1 and the diffusion coefficient were observed that agreed quite well with those predicted theoretically (respectively around 1.3/°C and 2.4/°C).

We examined clinical outcomes associated with nonrandomised digoxin therapy in a postmyocardial infarction population with clinical heart failure (AIRE study). Our results raise concern about the safety of digoxin in this population.