Strength of clinical indication and therapeutic impact of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: The implantable cardioverter defibrillator(ICD) has revolutionized the management of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) at risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). However, the identification of ideal candidates remains challenging. We aimed to describe the long-term impact of the ICD for primary prevention in patients with HCM based on stringent (high SCD risk) vs lenient indications (need for pacing/personal choice). METHODS: Data from two Italian HCM Cardiomyopathy Units were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients >1 follow-up visits were divided into two groups according to ICD candidacy:stringent (high SCD risk) and lenient (need for pacing, patients' choice, physician advice despite lack of high SCD risk). Major cardiac events (composite of appropriate shock/intervention and SCD) was the primary endpoint. A safety endpoint was defined as a composite of inappropriate shocks and device-related complications. RESULTS: Of 2009 patients, 252(12.5%) received an ICD, including 27(1.3%) in secondary prevention and 225(11.2%) in primary prevention (age at implantation 49 ± 16 years; men 65.3%). Among those in primary prevention, 167(74.2%) had stringent, while 58(25.8%) had lenient indications. At 5 ± 4 years, only stringent ICD patients experienced major cardiac events (2.84%/year, 5-year cumulative incidence: 8.1%, 95%CI [3.5-14.1%]). ICD-related complications were similar across stringent and lenient subgroups. However, patients implanted >60 years had a significantly higher risk of adverse events. CONCLUSION: One third of ICD recipients with HCM in primary prevention received a lenient implantation and had no appropriate intervention. ICD implantation due to systematic upgrade in patients requiring pacing and increased risk perception may offer little advantage and increase complication rates.

Elevated Serum IgG4 Levels in a Young Patient with Polyserositis and Necator americanus Infection.

IgG4-related disease is a fibroinflammatory systemic condition characterized by tumefactive lesions, lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate rich in IgG4-positive plasma cells, storiform fibrosis, and elevated serum IgG4 concentrations. It has been described in virtually every organ system. Autoimmunity and infectious agents are potential immunologic triggers in IgG4-related disease. Herein, we describe a peculiar case of effusive-constrictive pericarditis in an 18-year-old boy with polyserositis and concomitant Necator americanus infection.

Safety and efficacy of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a Bayesian meta-analysis approach.

INTRODUCTION: Choosing between different non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is difficult due to the absence of head to head comparative studies. We performed a Bayesian meta-analysis to explore similarities and differences between different NOACs and to rank treatments overall for safety and efficacy outcomes. AREAS COVERED: Through a systematic literature search we identified randomized controlled Phase III trials of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban versus adjusted-dose warfarin in patients with NVAF. EXPERT OPINION: Warfarin ranked worst for all-cause mortality and intracranial bleedings and had a nil probability of ranking first for any outcome. The risk of major bleeding versus warfarin was lower with apixaban, dabigatran 110 mg, and both doses of edoxaban. All agents reduced the risk of intracranial bleeding versus warfarin. Edoxaban 30 mg was the best among the treatments being compared for major and gastrointestinal bleeding. Dabigatran 150 mg was the best for stroke and systemic embolism. This study suggests that NOACs are generally preferable to warfarin in patients with NVAF. However, safety and efficacy differences do exist among NOACs, which might drive their use in specific subsets of AF patients, allowing prescribers to tailor treatment to distinct patient profiles.

Safety of dabigatran in an elderly population: single center experience in Italy.

In clinical practice, adherence to drugs and their safety may differ from randomised controlled trial settings. This study was undertaken to investigate the adherence to dabigatran, a direct thrombin inhibitor, and its safety in a real-world setting. We studied a prospective cohort of 114 elderly consecutive patients with non valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who were treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice-daily (N=39) or 110 mg twice-daily (N=76). These patients were studied at baseline and after an average of 6 months. Mean age was 80 years and 53% were women. At entry, the average CHA2DS2VASc score was 4 and the HAS-BLED score was 2. AF was permanent in 49% of patients, persistent in 30%, paroxysmal in 12% and new-onset in 24%. In the follow-up clinical visit we ascertained vital status, adherence to treatment according to refill prescription orders, and side effects. Adherence was ≥80% in 76.5% of patients. Heartburn, the most frequent adverse effect, was reported by 25 patients (22%). Major and minor bleedings were experienced by 2 (1.8%) and 9 (7.9%) patients, respectively. Permanent discontinuation occurred in 18 patients (16%). The most frequent cause of permanent discontinuation was heartburn (10 patients). This real-life study suggests that safety of dabigatran and adherence to this drug in an elderly cohort of AF patients at high or very high risk of thromboembolism are generally good. Heartburn is the main cause of treatment discontinuation.

Clinical utility of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the management of hypertension.

Accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for the diagnosis, monitoring and management of hypertension. However, conventional office-based BP readings have several limitations that include a low reproducibility, the white-coat effect and the existence of masked hypertension. These limitations can be addressed through the use of ambulatory BP monitoring. Because ambulatory monitoring provides measurements at specific time intervals throughout a 24-hour period, this technique represents a better picture of the normal fluctuations in BP levels associated with daily activities and sleep. In addition, end-organ damage associated with hypertension is more closely related to ambulatory BP than office BP measurements and ambulatory BP profile give better prediction of clinical outcome than conventional BP measurements.

Efficacy and safety profile of aliskiren: practical implications for clinicians.

Renin-angiotensin-system (RAS) is an enzymatic cascade that plays a pivotal role in the development of arterial hypertension, kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. Inhibition of the RAS with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (ACE-Is) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has proved to be a successful strategy for the treatment of hypertension and related cardiovascular disorders. However, by reducing feedback inhibition of renin release, the effects of ACE-Is and ARBs lead to an increase in plasma renin concentration (PRC) and activity (PRA), limiting a complete inhibition of the RAS. Consequently the effects of a different pharmacological strategy that completely blocks the RAS upstream has been assessed in the last years. In this context, aliskiren is the first representative of a new class of non-peptide orally active renin inhibitor that blocks the RAS at its rate-limiting step and induces a net reduction in PRA, angiotensin II and aldosterone levels. Aliskiren effectively reduces blood pressure as a monotherapy as well in combination therapy. In addition, aliskiren has a placebo-like tolerability profile at the licensed doses of 150 mg and 300 mg. Aliskiren also exhibits additive effects on blood pressure reduction when combined with drugs that lead to a reactive increase in the PRA, such as diuretics, ACE-Is or ARBs. In previous studies, aliskiren showed beneficial effects in patients with arterial hypertension and associated clinical conditions. However, later trials indicated that the use of aliskiren should be avoided in patients with renal failure or receiving ACE-Is or ARBs. The main aim of this review is to summarize the available data on its efficacy and safety profile, highlighting clinical implications from recent trials.