Rosuvastatin prevents aortic arch plaque progression and improves prognosis in ischemic stroke patients.

OBJECTIVES: Complicated aortic arch plaques (CAP) and their progression are important for recurrent ischemic stroke (IS) and its prognosis. We investigated the effects and clinical benefits of rosuvastatin therapy on this pathophysiology. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether rosuvastatin prevention of aortic arch plaque progression improved the prognosis of IS patients. METHODS: Ninety-seven consecutive acute cerebral embolism patients were retrospectively surveyed. All had transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) to assess the presence or absence of CAP, defined as aortic wall thickness ≥4 mm or plaque ulceration. Patients received conventional antithrombotic therapy as clinically indicated. All patients with CAP were recommended to receive 5 mg rosuvastatin/day, administered by their attending physicians; not all physicians followed this recommendation. Six-month follow-up TEEs were performed in patients with CAP who received rosuvastatin. Major adverse cerebrovascular events (MACEs) comprised recurrent IS and death. RESULTS: CAP was detected in 39 patients (40%), and MACEs in 15. Multivariate regression analysis showed that patients with CAP not taking rosuvastatin was an independent risk factor for MACEs (odds ratio = 18.044; 95% confidential interval = 2.089-155.846, p < 0.01). When patients were divided into three groups: those with CAP taking rosuvastatin, those with CAP not taking rosuvastatin, and those without CAP, Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients with CAP not taking rosuvastatin had significantly more MACEs than those in the other two groups (long-rank test; χ2 = 6.553, p < 0.05). Six-month TEE follow-ups in the 26 patients with CAP taking rosuvastatin showed significant improvement in CAP diameter with improved lipid profiles; 88% (23/26 patients) showed no morphological CAP progression; 15 of these showed CAP regression. DISCUSSION: Rosuvastatin therapy prevented aortic arch plaque progression in IS patients with CAP, and may also have long-term clinical benefits.

[Evaluation of preoperative cardiac function for orthopedic surgery by chest CT and coronary arteriogram].

BACKGROUND: In patients with spinal cord diseases, it is difficult to obtain stress electrocardiogram and to evaluate preoperative cardiac risk. We evaluate these patients by chest CT and if the patients have calcified coronary artery, we recommend further testing by coronary arteriogram. METHODS: We evaluated the patients who had undergone coronary arteriogram from January 2008 through December 2009. RESULTS: In 27 out of 158 cases (17.1%) operations were postponed or cancelled. In 12 out of 112 patients with no subjective symptom but with coronary calcification operations were also postponed or cancelled. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative chest CT and coronary arteriogram are useful for evaluation of preoperative cardiac function.

Two principal components, coping and independence, comprise patient enablement in Japan: cross sectional study in Tohoku area.

The concept of "patient enablement" involves patients' perceptions of ability to understand and cope with illness. Improving enablement is an important goal of medical consultations for patients with chronic illness. To measure "enablement," a post-medical-consultation patient-reported questionnaire was developed and named "Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI)" in the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, there has been no tool to evaluate patient enablement in Japan. Therefore, this study aimed to develop PEI Japanese version, to examine its validity and reliability, and to clarify the constitution of concept about patient enablement among Japanese patients. The translation process included forward translation, expert panel back-translation, following the standard WHO process. Participants were 256 individuals (157 men and 99 women; mean age 62.9 ± 11.8 years) receiving a regular outpatient treatment due to chronic illness at the Department of Cardiology, Respiratory, or Endocrinology and Metabolism in a regional hospital. To assess validity, we compared PEI with Medical Interview Satisfaction Scale (MISS) by correlation coefficient, which was 0.55 (P < 0.01). Furthermore, factor analysis indicated that PEI had two principal factors labeled "coping with illness and health maintenance" and "confidence in oneself and independence". For an evaluation of reliability, internal consistency was calculated (Cronbach's alpha = 0.875). In conclusion, two principal factors comprise patient enablement measured by PEI with satisfactory validity and reliability. PEI Japanese version will be a useful tool to evaluate and improve medical consultations in Japan.