Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
Más filtros












Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Arch. cardiol. Méx ; 94(2): 208-218, Apr.-Jun. 2024. tab, graf
Artículo en Español | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1556918

RESUMEN

Resumen El tratamiento del infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST tiene barreras dependiendo de la región geográfica. La angioplastia coronaria primaria es el tratamiento de elección, siempre y cuando sea realizada dentro de tiempo y por operadores experimentados. Sin embargo, cuando no está disponible, la administración de fibrinólisis y el envío para angioplastia de rescate, en caso de reperfusión negativa, es la mejor estrategia. De la misma manera, la angioplastia coronaria, como parte de una estrategia farmacoinvasiva, es la mejor alternativa cuando hay reperfusión positiva. El desarrollo de redes de tratamiento del infarto aumenta el número de pacientes reperfundidos dentro de los tiempos recomendados y mejora los desenlaces. En América Latina, los programas nacionales para el tratamiento del infarto deben centrarse en mejorar los resultados y el éxito a largo plazo depende de trabajar hacia objetivos definidos y obtener métricas de rendimiento, por lo tanto, estos deben desarrollar métricas para cuantificar su desempeño. El siguiente documento discute todas estas alternativas y sugiere oportunidades de mejora.


Abstract The treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction has barriers depending on the geographic region. Primary coronary angioplasty is the treatment of choice, if it is performed on time and by experienced operators. However, when it is not available, the administration of fibrinolysis and referral for rescue angioplasty, in case of negative reperfusion, is the best strategy. In the same way, coronary angioplasty, as part of a pharmacoinvasive strategy, is the best alternative when there is positive reperfusion. The development of infarct treatment networks increases the number of patients reperfused within the recommended times and improves outcomes. In Latin America, national myocardial infarction treatment programs should focus on improving outcomes, and long-term success depends on working toward defined goals and enhancing functionality, therefore programs should develop capacity to measure their performance. The following document discusses all of these alternatives and suggests opportunities for improvement.

2.
Arch Cardiol Mex ; 94(2): 208-218, 2024 01 16.
Artículo en Español | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38227853

RESUMEN

The treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction has barriers depending on the geographic region. Primary coronary angioplasty is the treatment of choice, if it is performed on time and by experienced operators. However, when it is not available, the administration of fibrinolysis and referral for rescue angioplasty, in case of negative reperfusion, is the best strategy. In the same way, coronary angioplasty, as part of a pharmacoinvasive strategy, is the best alternative when there is positive reperfusion. The development of infarct treatment networks increases the number of patients reperfused within the recommended times and improves outcomes. In Latin America, national myocardial infarction treatment programs should focus on improving outcomes, and long-term success depends on working toward defined goals and enhancing functionality, therefore programs should develop capacity to measure their performance. The following document discusses all of these alternatives and suggests opportunities for improvement.


El tratamiento del infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST tiene barreras dependiendo de la región geográfica. La angioplastia coronaria primaria es el tratamiento de elección, siempre y cuando sea realizada dentro de tiempo y por operadores experimentados. Sin embargo, cuando no está disponible, la administración de fibrinólisis y el envío para angioplastia de rescate, en caso de reperfusión negativa, es la mejor estrategia. De la misma manera, la angioplastia coronaria, como parte de una estrategia farmacoinvasiva, es la mejor alternativa cuando hay reperfusión positiva. El desarrollo de redes de tratamiento del infarto aumenta el número de pacientes reperfundidos dentro de los tiempos recomendados y mejora los desenlaces. En América Latina, los programas nacionales para el tratamiento del infarto deben centrarse en mejorar los resultados y el éxito a largo plazo depende de trabajar hacia objetivos definidos y obtener métricas de rendimiento, por lo tanto, estos deben desarrollar métricas para cuantificar su desempeño. El siguiente documento discute todas estas alternativas y sugiere oportunidades de mejora.

3.
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv ; 2(3): 100629, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39130696

RESUMEN

Background: The PIONEER III trial demonstrated noninferiority of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF) with the Supreme DES (Sinomed), a thin-strut cobalt-chromium, biodegradable polymer, sirolimus-eluting stent, compared with a durable polymer, everolimus-eluting (XIENCE/PROMUS) stent (DP-EES). The relative safety and effectiveness of the Supreme DES in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and those with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) is not known. Methods: PIONEER III was a prospective, multicenter, international, 2:1 randomized trial stratified by clinical presentation. The primary end point was TLF at 12 months (a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization). Results: A total of 1628 patients were enrolled, including 41% of patients with ACS (unstable angina and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction) randomized to Supreme DES (n = 441) versus DP-EES (n = 232) and 59% of patients with CCS randomized to Supreme DES (n = 645) versus DP-EES (n = 310). Patients with ACS were younger, fewer presented with less diabetes, hypertension, and previous revascularization, but more were current smokers. The primary end point of TLF (6.4% vs 4.4%; P = .1), major adverse cardiac events (8.5% vs 6.5%; P = .16), and stent thrombosis (0.4% vs 0.9%; P = .25) at 12 months were similar in the ACS and CCS groups. There was no difference in TLF at 12 months between Supreme DES and DP-EES among patients with ACS (6.6% vs 6.0%; P = .89) and those with CCS (4.5% vs 4.3%; P = .83); interaction P = .51 for TLF by clinical presentation. Conclusions: Compared with the DP-EES, the Supreme DES seemed safe and effective with a similar TLF at 12 months in both patients with ACS and those with CCS.

4.
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv ; 2(1): 100515, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39132534

RESUMEN

Background: The PIONEER III trial showed the 12-month safety and efficacy of the Supreme drug-eluting stent (DES) vs the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. We sought to assess whether the characteristics and clinical outcomes of the Supreme DES in PIONEER III were consistent among patients by enrollment location. Methods: This subgroup analysis of the PIONEER III trial compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients recruited from North America, Europe, and Japan and the relative differences in patient outcomes according to the site recruitment volume. Results: From October 2017 to July 2019, 1629 patients were recruited in North America (816, 50.1%), Europe (650, 39.9%), and Japan (163, 10%). Procedural success was achieved in 1556 of 1611 procedures (96.6%), with no difference by the geographic location. Target lesion failure at 12 months for combined groups was observed in 84 of 1629 patients (5.2%), with no significant geographic differences (4.7%, 6.5%, and 2.5%, respectively; P =.08), with similar results in the Supreme DES group alone (4.4%, 6.8%, and 3.7%, respectively, P =.20). Cardiac death at 12 months occurred in 0.4%, 0.2%, and 0.0% (P =.79), target vessel-related myocardial infarction occurred in 2.2%, 4.7%, and 3.7%, (P =.10), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization was required in 2.1%, 3.1%, and 0%, respectively (P =.15). Compared with those from high-recruiting sites, results from low-recruiting sites were similar for target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac events, stent thrombosis, and mortality, with a nonsignificant trend for higher rates of myocardial infarction. Conclusions: Despite regional differences in patient characteristics, the clinical outcomes between Supreme DES and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in the PIONEER III trial were not different, supporting the generalizability and robustness of the findings from this multicenter controlled trial.

5.
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv ; 1(2): 100033, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39132558

RESUMEN

Background: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have worse outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention than nondiabetic patients. The novel Supreme DES is a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent designed to synchronize early drug delivery, limiting the potential for long-term inflammatory response. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Supreme DES in patients with DM. Methods: This is a prespecified analysis of the diabetic subgroup from the PIONEER III randomized (2:1), controlled trial, comparing the Supreme DES with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). The primary safety and efficacy composite endpoint was target lesion failure at 1 year, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Results: The PIONEER III trial randomized 1629 patients, of which 494 (30.3%) had DM with 331 (398 lesions) randomly assigned to Supreme DES and 163 (208 lesions) to DP-EES. Among patients with DM, target lesion failure at 1 year was 6.1% (20/331) with Supreme DES vs 3.7% (6/163) with DP-EES (hazard ratio = 1.65; 95% confidence interval = 0.66-4.10, P = .28). The composite of cardiac death or target vessel myocardial infarction was 3.3% (11/331) with Supreme DES and 3.7% (6/163) with DP-EES (hazard ratio = 0.90; 95% confidence interval = 0.33-2.44, P = .83). There were no significant differences in other secondary endpoints. Conclusions: This prespecified substudy of the PIONEER III trial demonstrated the relative safety and efficacy of the novel Supreme DES when compared with commercially available DP-EES in diabetics at 1 year. Longer term follow-up will be required to ensure continued safety and efficacy of the Supreme DES.

7.
Arch. cardiol. Méx ; 84(3): 218-223, jul.-sep. 2014. ilus
Artículo en Inglés | LILACS | ID: lil-732017

RESUMEN

Anthracyclines are cytostatic antibiotics discovered almost half a century ago exerting their action through inhibition of topoisomerase II. The two most representative drugs are doxorubicin and daunorubicin and they have been proven as useful antineoplastics and are widely prescribed in daily oncology practice; unfortunately, cardiotoxicity has been a limiting factor when it comes to their use. Diverse mechanisms have been involved in anthracycline cardiotoxicity, none of which are capable of causing the whole clinical picture by itself. Traditionally, reactive oxygen species (ROS) have received more attention, although recently basic research has proven other factors to be as important as ROS. These factors mainly involve sarcomeric structure disruption, toxic accumulation of metabolites, iron metabolism, energetic alterations and inflammation. The role of genetics has been studied by some groups, although a clear genotype-response relationship is yet to be elucidated. With the improved survival from different oncologic diseases we are witnessing more cases of chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and the advent of new anticancer drugs poses several challenges for the cardiologist, highlighting the importance of a deep knowledge of the main mechanisms inducing this toxicity.


Hace casi medio siglo se descubrieron las antraciclinas; estas son antibióticos citostáticos inhibidores de la topoisomerasa II. Los 2 fármacos más representativos de este grupo son la doxorrubicina y la daunorrubicina. Estos fármacos han demostrado ser eficaces antineoplásicos y han sido ampliamente utilizados en la práctica oncológica. Desafortunadamente, la cardiotoxicidad sigue siendo un elemento limitante para su uso. Los mecanismos mediante los cuales estos fármacos ocasionan cardiotoxicidad son múltiples pero ninguno de ellos de forma individual es capaz de explicar el cuadro clínico por completo. Casi siempre se ha considerado que la formación de especies reactivas de oxígeno era responsable de gran parte de la toxicidad, sin embargo la experimentación básica reciente ha demostrado que hay otros factores, entre los que destacan las alteraciones en la estructura sarcomérica, la acumulación de metabolitos tóxicos, las alteraciones del metabolismo del hierro o de los mecanismos energéticos, y la liberación de mediadores de inflamación. Por otra parte, diversos grupos han investigado la intervención que la genética podría tener en el desarrollo de esta enfermedad, si bien no se puede definir aún una clara correlación genotipo-respuesta. Con el aumento de la supervivencia por el tratamiento de diversas enfermedades oncológicas, se están detectando más casos de cardiotoxicidad mediada por quimioterapia; y con la aparición de nuevos fármacos quimioterápicos se añaden nuevos retos, con lo que se demuestra la importancia del estudio profundo de los mecanismos causales.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Antraciclinas/efectos adversos , Cardiomiopatías/inducido químicamente , Antraciclinas/metabolismo , Cardiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...