Search

[Expert Consensus document on angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in cardiovascular disease]

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 organisations 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. 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 endorsement of these Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents or statements. The Task Force has classified and ranked the usefulness or …

ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG), Silvia G. Priori (Chairperson) (Italy), Maria Angeles Alonso Garcia (Spain), Jean-Jacques Blanc (France), Andrzej Budaj (Poland), Martin Cowie (UK), Veronica Dean (France), Jaap Deckers (The Netherlands), Enrique Fernandez Burgos (Spain), John Lekakis (Greece), Bertil Lindahl (Sweden), Gianfranco Mazzotta (Italy), Keith McGregor (France), Joao Morais (Portugal), Ali Oto (Turkey), Otto A. Smiseth (Norway) Document Reviewers, Maria Angeles Alonso Garcia (CPG Review Coordinator) (Spain), Diego Ardissino (Italy), Cristina Avendano (Spain), Carina Blomstrom-Lundqvist (Sweden), Denis Clement (Belgium), Helmut Drexler (Germany), Roberto Ferrari (Italy), Keith A. Fox (UK), Desmond Julian (UK), Peter Kearney (Ireland), Werner Klein (Austria), Lars Kober (Denmark), Giuseppe Mancia (Italy), Markku Nieminen (Finland), Witold Ruzyllo (Poland), Maarten Simoons (The Netherlands) Kristian Thygesen (Denmark), Gianni Tognoni (Italy), Isabella Tritto (Italy), Lars Wallentin (Sweden) 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 organisations 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 …

Background Hypertension and cyclosporine-induced nephrotoxicity are common complications in heart transplant recipients. Omega-3 fatty acids may prevent blood pressure rise early, but have not been studied long-term after heart transplantation. Methods and Results Forty-five clinically stable hypertensive heart transplant recipients were studied 1–12 years after transplantation and randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either 3·4g of omega-3 fatty acids daily or placebo for 1 year. Ambulatory 24h blood pressure monitoring and haemodynamic studies were performed before randomization and at the end of the study. Systolic blood pressure increased by 8±3mmHg ( P