Search

Two major changes in patient characteristics and management occurred recently that demand distinctive alterations in the function of the intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU). These changes include the introduction of an early invasive strategy for the treatment of acute coronary syndromes, enabling early recuperation and shorter need for intensive care on the one hand, while the number of older and sicker patients requiring prolonged and more complex intensive care is steadily increasing. A task force of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Acute Cardiac Care was set to give a modern updated comprehensive recommendations concerning the structure, organization, and function of the modern ICCUs and intermediate cardiac units. These include the statement that specially trained cardiologists and cardiac nurses who can manage patients with acute cardiac conditions should staff the ICCUs. The optimum number of physicians, nurses, and other personal working in the unit is included. The document indicates the desired architecture and structure of the units and the intermediate cardiac unit and their relations to the other facilities in the hospital. Specific recommendations are also included for the minimal number of beds, monitoring system, respirators, pacemaker/defibrillators, and necessary additional equipment. The desired function is discussed, namely, the patients to be admitted, the length of stay, and the relocation policy. A uniformed electronic chart for ICCUs is advised, anticipating a common European database.

Guidelines and Expert Consensus documents aim to present all the relevant evidence on a particular issue in order to help physicians to weigh the benefits and risks of a particular diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. They should be helpful in everyday clinical decision-making. A great number of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and by different organizations and other related societies. This profusion can put at stake the authority and validity of guidelines, which can only be guaranteed if they have been developed by an unquestionable decision-making process. This is one of the reasons why the ESC and others have issued recommendations for formulating and issuing Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents. In spite of the fact that standards for issuing good quality Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents are well defined, recent surveys of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents published in peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 1998 have shown that methodological standards were not complied with in the vast majority of cases. It is therefore of great importance that guidelines and recommendations are presented in formats that are easily interpreted. Subsequently, their implementation programmes must also be well conducted. Attempts have been made to determine whether guidelines improve the quality of clinical practice and the utilization of health resources. The ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) supervises and coordinates the preparation of new Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents produced by Task Forces, expert groups or consensus panels. The chosen experts in these writing panels are asked to provide disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. The Committee is also responsible for the …

The impact of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABC) on survival of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) has been evaluated in this study of 85 patients. IABC was available for the 24 group A patients (and used in 20 patients). IABC was not available for the 21 group B patients who presented simultaneously with similar clinical characteristics and received identical pharmacological treatment. In-hospital and one year survival was significantly higher in group A (46% and 38% vs 19% and 10%, P < 0.001). Sixteen out of the 20 (group A1) IABC patients received early coronary revascularization. During 1980-1984, 35 patients with AMI and CS received IABC (group C) but none underwent early revascularization. There was no difference in in-hospital or one-year survival between group A1 (50% and 40%) and group C (45% and 40%). We conclude that early IABC improves survival of patients with AMI complicated by CS.

Cardiac rupture is a catastrophic complication of acute myocardial infarction. We describe a patient with acute myocardial infarction who received thrombolytic therapy and then developed cardiac rupture and tamponade during rescue angioplasty.