RESUMO
Background: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a major global health issue and a leading cause of death. This study compares the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the management of IHD, focusing on their impact on revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI), and post-procedural stroke. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of PCI and CABG in treating IHD based on an exhaustive literature review of the past 5 years, emphasizing recent advancements and outcomes in IHD management. Methods: A comprehensive literature review analyzed 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The study specifically assessed the incidences of revascularization, stroke, and MI in patients treated with either PCI or CABG. The comparison between CABG and PCI exclusively focused on lesions with a SYNTAX score exceeding 32. Results: Our findings highlight CABG's significant efficacy over PCI in reducing revascularization and MI. The aggregated Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) value for revascularization was 1.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.65 - 2.07), signifying CABG's advantage. Additionally, CABG demonstrated superior performance in diminishing MI occurrences (M-H = 2.71, 95% CI: 1.13 - 6.53). In contrast, PCI was more effective in reducing stroke (M-H = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.60 - 1.10). Conclusion: The study confirms CABG's superiority in reducing revascularization and MI in IHD patients, highlighting PCI's effectiveness in reducing stroke risk. These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies in IHD management and emphasize the need for ongoing research and evidence-based guidelines to aid in treatment selection for IHD patients.
RESUMO
In the realm of cardiovascular health, isolated left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) stands out for its distinct morphological features and the clinical challenges it presents, particularly in adults. This literature review explores the intricacies of LVNC, aiming to unravel its epidemiological spread, diagnostic hurdles, and therapeutic strategies. Despite technological advancements in cardiac imaging that have improved the recognition of LVNC, a significant gap persists alongside a fragmented understanding of its pathogenesis. The studies scrutinized reveal a broad spectrum of prevalence rates influenced by diverse diagnostic tools and demographic variables. This variation underscores the complexity of accurately identifying LVNC and the resultant implications for clinical management. The review succinctly addresses the need for precise guidelines to navigate the diagnosis of LVNC and outlines the imperative for tailored clinical management approaches that cater to the wide array of patient presentations, from asymptomatic cases to those with severe cardiac dysfunction. By highlighting the critical gaps in current literature-namely the absence of standardized diagnostic criteria and a comprehensive pathogenic model-the review sets the stage for future research directions. These endeavors are essential for enhancing diagnostic accuracy, refining management protocols, and ultimately improving patient outcomes in this complex subset of cardiomyopathy, thus contributing significantly to the advancement of cardiovascular medicine.
Assuntos
Miocárdio Ventricular não Compactado Isolado , Humanos , Miocárdio Ventricular não Compactado Isolado/diagnóstico , Miocárdio Ventricular não Compactado Isolado/terapia , Miocárdio Ventricular não Compactado Isolado/fisiopatologia , Adulto , Gerenciamento ClínicoRESUMO
Worldwide, the leading cause of death is cardiovascular disease. The study details the prescription of statins at the Pablo Arturo Suarez Hospital in Ecuador between March 2021 and February 2022 following the ASCVD risk scale of the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association. There are 563 people in this cross-sectional and retrospective study: 70% women, 30% men, 93.30% mestizos, 48.10% diabetics, 62.30% hypertensives, and 18.70% smokers. 26.10% of all patients received statins, with simvastatin being the most common (96.60%). The mean cardiovascular risk in the general population was 15.52 ± 14.51%, 44.99% of subjects had a risk lower than 7.50%, and 29% had a risk higher than 20%, with a statistically significant difference (p<0.001) according to sex. The study determined that 58.60% of the population received a statin or an inadequate dosage.
A nivel mundial, la principal causa de muerte es la enfermedad cardiovascular. El estudio detalla la prescripción de estatinas en el Hospital Pablo Arturo Suárez de Ecuador entre marzo de 2021 y febrero de 2022, siguiendo la escala de riesgo ASCVD del Colegio Americano de Cardiología y la Asociación Americana del Corazón. Son 563 personas en este estudio transversal y retrospectivo: 70% mujeres, 30% hombres, 93.30% mestizos, 48.10% diabéticos, 62.30% hipertensos y 18.70% fumadores. El 26.10% de los pacientes recibía estatinas, siendo la simvastatina la más frecuente (96.60%). El riesgo cardiovascular medio en la población general fue de 15.52 ± 14.51%, el 44.99% de los sujetos tenía un riesgo inferior al 7.50%, y el 29% tenía un riesgo superior al 20%, con una diferencia estadísticamente significativa (p<0.001) según el sexo. El estudio determinó que el 58.60% de la población recibía una estatina o una dosis inadecuada.