Skip header and navigation

Refine By

5 records – page 1 of 1.

Assessment of priority for coronary revascularisation procedures. Revascularisation Panel and Consensus Methods Group.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature229092
Source
Lancet. 1990 May 5;335(8697):1070-3
Publication Type
Conference/Meeting Material
Article
Date
May-5-1990
Author
C D Naylor
R S Baigrie
B S Goldman
A. Basinski
Author Affiliation
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, North York, Ontario, Canada.
Source
Lancet. 1990 May 5;335(8697):1070-3
Date
May-5-1990
Language
English
Publication Type
Conference/Meeting Material
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Angina Pectoris - radiography - therapy
Angina, Unstable - radiography - therapy
Coronary Disease - classification - radiography - surgery
Emergencies
Emergency Medical Services - standards
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Heart Function Tests
Humans
Models, Statistical
Myocardial Revascularization - methods
Observer Variation
Ontario
Questionnaires
Reference Standards
Regression Analysis
Risk factors
Severity of Illness Index
Time Factors
Triage - standards
Abstract
To develop guidelines for ranking the urgency with which patients with angiographically proven coronary disease need revascularisation procedures, factors that a panel of cardiac specialists agreed were likely to affect urgency were incorporated into 438 fictitious case-histories. Each panelist then rated the cases on a 7-point scale based on maximum acceptable waiting time for surgery; 1 on the scale represented emergency surgery and 7 delays of up to 6 months. For only 1% of cases was there agreement on a single rating by at least 12/16 panelists. Results of this ranking exercise were used by the panel to draw up triage guidelines. The three main urgency determinants were severity and stability of symptoms of angina, coronary anatomy from angiographic studies, and results of non-invasive tests for risk of ischaemia. Together these three factors generally gave an urgency rating for any given case to within less than 0.25 scale points of the value predicted with all factors. A numerical scoring system was derived to permit rapid estimation of the panel's recommended ratings.
Notes
Comment In: Lancet. 1990 Aug 4;336(8710):310-11973994
PubMed ID
1970377 View in PubMed
Less detail

Low restenosis rate of the NIR coronary stent: results of the Danish multicenter stent study (DANSTENT)--a randomized trial comparing a first-generation stent with a second-generation stent.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature53593
Source
Am Heart J. 2003 Feb;145(2):e5
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-2003
Author
Erik Jørgensen
Henning Kelbaek
Steffen Helqvist
Gunnar V H Jensen
Kari Saunamäki
Jens Kastrup
Jan Kyst Madsen
Lene Kløvgaard
Leif Thuesen
Anton Villadsen
Anton W M van Weert
Johan H C Reiber
Author Affiliation
Department of Cardiology, The Heart Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. erikj@rh.dk
Source
Am Heart J. 2003 Feb;145(2):e5
Date
Feb-2003
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Angina Pectoris - radiography - therapy
Angina, Unstable - radiography - therapy
Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Restenosis - prevention & control - radiography
Denmark
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Multivariate Analysis
Myocardial Ischemia - radiography - therapy
Odds Ratio
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Stents
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Larger studies evaluating the angiographic results of second-generation stents are scarce. The objectives of this study were to assess current standards of angiographic and clinical outcomes after implantation of the second-generation stainless steel stent, NIR (Medinol Ltd, Tel Aviv, Israel), and to compare the outcomes with those of the first-generation Palmaz-Schatz (PS) stent (Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ). METHODS: Patients having coronary artery lesions that could be covered by a stent of 15 mm in length were randomly assigned to receive the NIR or the PS. Procedural success, 6-month angiographic findings, and 1-year clinical outcomes were determined. RESULTS: In 424 patients included in the study, the overall procedural success rate was high (NIR 98%, PS 99%, P =.90). Follow-up angiography was conducted in 91% of the patients. The overall rate of angiographic restenosis was low in both groups (NIR 9.9%, PS 12.6%, P =.35). We found a low restenosis rate in vessels with a minimal lumen diameter >3.1 mm after the procedure, particularly in the NIR group (
PubMed ID
12595860 View in PubMed
Less detail

[PCI is now a refined method for treatment of coronary stenoses]

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature53085
Source
Lakartidningen. 2005 Sep 5-11;102(36):2478-81
Publication Type
Article
Author
Per Tornvall
Tage Nilsson
Jens Jensen
Author Affiliation
Hjärtkliniken, Karolinska Universitetssjukhuset Solna, Stockholm, Sweden. per.tornvall@karolinska.se
Source
Lakartidningen. 2005 Sep 5-11;102(36):2478-81
Language
Swedish
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Angina Pectoris - radiography - therapy
Angina, Unstable - radiography - therapy
Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary - methods - trends
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Stenosis - radiography - therapy
English Abstract
Humans
Myocardial Infarction - radiography - therapy
Abstract
The technique of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has improved considerably over the last decades. Important developments have been the introduction of stents and better anticoagulation treatment. PCI is used most commonly in the treatment of unstable angina pectoris or non ST-elevation myocardial infarction. In Sweden today, more than half of the patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction are treated primarily with PCI. Despite the high degree of opening of the infarct-related artery, the reduction in mortality is modest compared with treatment with thrombolysis indicating that there is room for considerable improvement. There is a need for randomised studies of adjunctive therapies but it can be speculated that thrombectomy devices and specific reperfusion injury therapy might reduce mortality in PCI treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
PubMed ID
16196433 View in PubMed
Less detail

Snoring and progression of coronary artery disease: The Stockholm Female Coronary Angiography Study.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature9319
Source
Sleep. 2004 Nov 1;27(7):1344-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Nov-1-2004
Author
Constanze Leineweber
Göran Kecklund
Imre Janszky
Torbjörn Akerstedt
Kristina Orth-Gomér
Author Affiliation
Karolinska Institute, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden.
Source
Sleep. 2004 Nov 1;27(7):1344-9
Date
Nov-1-2004
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Angina, Unstable - radiography
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Arteriosclerosis - radiography
Disease Progression
Fatigue - radiography
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Middle Aged
Myocardial Infarction - radiography
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Risk factors
Snoring - complications - radiography
Sweden
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Snoring is associated with a significant increased risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke. However, our knowledge of mechanisms is still incomplete. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of snoring in combination with feelings of tiredness on the 3-year progression of atherosclerosis in women with cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: Repeated quantitative coronary angiograms were carried out with an average time interval of 3.25 years. SETTING: Department of Thoracic Radiology at Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: The study sample comprised 103 women cardiac patients with repeated, valid, and comparable measurement of quantitative coronary angiograms. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Absolute luminal diameter (in mm) was measured in 10 predefined coronary segments. Mean segment diameter was calculated as the mean of all diameters measured along a given segment. The change over time was calculated by subtracting the first from the second measurement. Snoring and feelings of tiredness were measured by a short version of the Karolinska Sleep Questionnaire. We found that snoring women, after adjusting for age, waist-hip ratio, smoking, event at hospitalization, education, hypertension and alcohol intake, had a statistically significantly larger progression of atherosclerosis than did nonsnoring women (0.18 mm vs 0.07 mm change; P = .0006). CONCLUSION: Snoring contributes to the atherosclerotic process and should be taken into consideration when treating patients with cardiac disease.
PubMed ID
15586787 View in PubMed
Less detail
Source
CMAJ. 1987 Jan 1;136(1):17-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-1-1987
Author
D D Waters
P. Théroux
Source
CMAJ. 1987 Jan 1;136(1):17-9
Date
Jan-1-1987
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Angina, Unstable - radiography - therapy
Angioplasty, Balloon
Canada
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Care Units
Humans
Myocardial Infarction - therapy
Notes
Cites: CMAJ. 1986 Apr 1;134(7):741-42868788
Cites: Br Heart J. 1972 Jan;34(1):67-805059657
Cites: Am J Cardiol. 1972 Sep;30(4):405-74560377
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1976 Dec 16;295(25):1404-13790194
Cites: Johns Hopkins Med J. 1977 Dec;141(6):287-95592601
Cites: Lancet. 1978 Apr 22;1(8069):837-4176794
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 1979 May;90(5):737-40434671
Cites: Am Heart J. 1982 Jan;103(1):13-207055033
Cites: Circulation. 1982 Nov;66(5):905-136215184
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1983 Dec 15;309(24):1477-826358886
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1984 Mar 8;310(10):609-136537987
Cites: Acta Med Scand. 1971 Apr;189(4):285-915115503
Cites: JAMA. 1960 Jul 9;173:1064-714411374
Cites: Lancet. 1963 Aug 17;2(7303):349-5214044279
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1956 Apr 19;254(16):727-3213309666
Cites: Am J Cardiol. 1986 Sep 1;58(6):465-93489403
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1986 May 8;314(19):1214-92871485
Cites: J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986 Apr;7(4):717-282937825
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1986 Mar 27;314(13):812-82936956
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 1985 Sep;103(3):445-93896088
Cites: J Am Coll Cardiol. 1985 Aug;6(2):426-333160757
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1985 Aug 8;313(6):342-63159964
Cites: J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984 Jun;3(6):1575-806609181
Cites: Lancet. 1967 Aug 5;2(7510):271-34165912
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1970 Aug 27;283(9):447-515434111
PubMed ID
2947671 View in PubMed
Less detail