Recognizing and Tackling Inhaler Technique Decay in Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disesase (COPD) Clinical Practice.

A poor inhaler technique continues to represent a substantial barrier to effective asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management. It can result in perceived lack of treatment effectiveness even with apparent adherence to a prescribed regimen of inhaled maintenance therapies, potentially resulting in an unnecessary change or escalation of treatment. Many patients are not trained to inhaler mastery in real-world practice; furthermore, even where mastery is initially achieved, an ongoing assessment and education are seldom maintained. In this review, we present an overview of the evidence for deterioration of the inhaler technique over time after training, investigate the factors that contribute to this deterioration, and explore innovative approaches to addressing the problem. We also propose steps forward drawn from the literature and our clinical insights.

Implant experience with an implantable hemodynamic monitor for the management of symptomatic heart failure.

INTRODUCTION: Management of congestive heart failure is a serious public health problem. The use of implantable hemodynamic monitors (IHMs) may assist in this management by providing continuous ambulatory filling pressure status for optimal volume management. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Chronicle system includes an implanted monitor, a pressure sensor lead with passive fixation, an external pressure reference (EPR), and data retrieval and viewing components. The tip of the lead is placed near the right ventricular outflow tract to minimize risk of sensor tissue encapsulation. Implant technique and lead placement is similar to that of a permanent pacemaker. After the system had been successfully implanted in 148 patients, the type and frequency of implant-related adverse events were similar to a single-chamber pacemaker implant. R-wave amplitude was 15.2 +/- 6.7 mV and the pressure waveform signal was acceptable in all but two patients in whom presence of artifacts required lead repositioning. Implant procedure time was not influenced by experience, remaining constant throughout the study. CONCLUSION: Based on this evaluation, permanent placement of an IHM in symptomatic heart failure patients is technically feasible. Further investigation is warranted to evaluate the use of the continuous hemodynamic data in management of heart failure patients.

Differences in tachyarrhythmia detection and implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy by primary or secondary prevention indication in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients.

INTRODUCTION: Although numerous trials have shown benefit of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for either primary or secondary prevention, no trial has prospectively enrolled patients from both indications and analyzed ICD utilization between groups. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective review of MIRACLE ICD, a randomized, prospective double-blind trial of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) in the ICD population. Both secondary prevention (N = 563) and primary prevention patients (N = 415) were enrolled. Subgroup analysis for frequency of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) episodes and detection accuracy revealed that primary prevention patients had a significantly lower frequency of appropriate episodes (0.09 vs 0.43 episodes/month) at significantly faster cycle lengths (303 +/- 54 ms vs 366 +/- 71 ms, P < 0.0001). These episodes were more likely to be classified as VF by the device and thus receive shock therapy (42% by device classification vs 19% in secondary prevention, P < 0.0001). The absolute rate of inappropriate detections in the primary prevention group per month of follow-up was lower but constituted a much higher proportion of all episodes (30% vs 14%, P < 0.0001). Most inappropriate detections in the secondary prevention group were due to rapidly conducted atrial fibrillation; most in the primary prevention patients were due to sinus tachycardia. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving an ICD for CRT therapy with primary prevention indications have a different clinical arrhythmia course than patients with a history of spontaneous VT/VF. This has implications for the optimal programming of ICDs. Longer-term, prospective evaluation of these differences is warranted and should be investigated in the broader ICD patient population.