Learning from the early careers of master clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Master clinicians are recognized as multidimensional experts in clinical medicine. Studying their formative clinical activities could generate insights to guide medical trainees and early career clinicians. OBJECTIVES: To investigate which early career activities were adopted more commonly by master clinicians than their matched peers and to characterize master clinicians' early career activities across institutions and specialties. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We surveyed master clinicians at seven medical centres about their early career activities. For master clinicians in the Department of Medicine (DOM), we also surveyed matched internist peers. RESULTS: Of 150 master clinician respondents, 65% were internists (DOM); 35% practiced in other specialties. Compared to their internist peers, there was a trend toward internist master clinicians reading more about their patients' conditions (6.0 vs. 4.8 h per week), reading more case reports (4.0 vs. 2.1 per month), engaging in more frequent teaching duties and devoting less time to research. CONCLUSIONS: The early career activities identified in this study can be adopted by clinicians pursuing clinical excellence and promoted by training programs that seek to foster life-long learning.

Emergent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Insufficiency.

There are few case reports in the literature of transcatheter aortic valve replacement used as emergent therapy for aortic insufficiency. We present a case in which transcatheter aortic valve replacement was implemented successfully as a salvage therapy in a hemodynamically unstable patient having aortic insufficiency as a result of a torn bioprosthetic leaflet during an unrelated abdominal operation. The successful use of this technique in a noncardiac operating room allowed the patient to be placed on extracorporeal support and ultimately to be discharged home.

Transmyocardial laser revascularization: a review of basic and clinical aspects.

Transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMR or TMLR) is a surgical therapy developed to treat patients with debilitating, medically refractory angina pectoris due to epicardial coronary artery disease that is not amenable to treatment using the traditional methods of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). This technique can also be applied percutaneously [percutaneous myocardial revascularization (PMR) or direct myocardial revascularization (DMR)]. The original hypotheses which motivated development of TMR were that: (i) oxygenated blood could flow directly from the left ventricle and perfuse the myocardium; and (ii) such artificially created channels would remain patent. However, experimental data have refuted both hypotheses. In the face of early reports of marked clinical benefits in terms of relief of anginal symptoms, alternate hypotheses to explain the mechanism have been pursued, including TMR-associated neoangiogenesis and cardiac denervation. Clinically, numerous reports of reduction in frequency and severity of anginal symptoms, improved exercise tolerance and improved quality of life have appeared from nonblind registry-type studies as well as nonblind randomized clinical trials of TMR or PMR versus continued medical therapy. TMR was not associated with a significant improvement in survival compared with medical therapy alone in randomized trials. For example, the prospective, randomized Angina Treatments-Lasers and Normal Therapies in Comparison (ATLANTIC) trial found a 1-year mortality of 5% in 92 TMR-treated patients and 10% in 90 patients treated with medication only. No proof of improved myocardial blood flow in hearts of treated patients is currently available. The first randomized study of PMR was the Potential Angina Class Improvement From Intramyocardial Channels (PACIFIC) trial which found significantly greater improvements in anginal symptoms and exercise tolerance with PMR plus medical therapy, compared with medical therapy alone. The preliminary results of two double-blind studies with PMR/DMR have been presented but have not yet been published in full. Whereas PMR-treated patients did significantly better than sham-treated control groups after 6 months in the Blinded Evaluation of Laser Intervention Electively For angina pectoris (BELIEF) trial, there was no difference after 1 year between DMR-treated patients and those treated with medication only in the DMR In Regeneration of Endomyocardial Channels Trial (DIRECT). Different devices used for revascularization in these two trials may explain the disparity in the results, and therefore the efficacy and tolerability of each device should be judged upon data collected with that particular device.