Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Angiology ; 73(2): 112-119, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34318686

ABSTRACT

Data regarding angiographic characteristics, clinical profile, and inhospital outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) referred for coronary angiography (CAG) are scarce. This is an observational study analyzing confirmed patients with COVID-19 referred for CAG from 10 European centers. We included 57 patients (mean age: 66 ± 15 years, 82% male) , of whom 18% had previous myocardial infarction (MI) and 29% had renal insufficiency and chronic pulmonary disease. ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) was the most frequent indication for CAG (58%). Coronavirus disease 2019 was confirmed after CAG in 86% and classified as mild in 49%, with 21% fully asymptomatic. A culprit lesion was identified in 79% and high thrombus burden in 42%; 7% had stent thrombosis. At 40 days follow-up, 16 (28%) patients experienced a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE): 12 deaths (92% noncardiac), 1 MI, 2 stent thrombosis, and 1 stroke. In an European multicenter registry, patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection referred for CAG during the first wave of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic presented mostly with STEMI and were predominantly males with comorbidities. Severity of COVID-19 was in general noncritical and 21% were asymptomatic at the time of CAG. Culprit coronary lesions with high thrombus burden were frequently identified, with a rate of stent thrombosis of 7%. The incidence of MACE at 40 days was high (28%), mostly due to noncardiac death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Coronary Angiography , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
3.
Neth Heart J ; 19(1): 24-30, 2011 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21350585

ABSTRACT

In 1980, Dr. Michel Mirowski and his team inserted the first implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in a patient. Initially, ICD therapy was not widely accepted, and many physicians actually considered this therapy unethical. Large secondary and primary prevention trials, demonstrating a beneficial effect of ICD therapy in selected patients not only on arrhythmic death but also on all-cause mortality, stimulated a rapid growth in the number of implants and increased patient's and physician's acceptance. Improvements in size and weight, arrhythmia discrimination capabilities, battery technology, shock waveform and output, monitoring capabilities and defibrillator electrode technology eventually resulted in the current large number of yearly implants. Today, almost 40 years after the conception of the ICD and 25 years after the first human implant, ICD therapy is the treatment of choice for patients at risk for life-threatening arrhythmias either as secondary or primary prevention. Furthermore, with the more recent addition of resynchronisation therapy to standard ICD therapy, it became possible to treat selected patients with advanced symptoms of heart failure and to lower the risk of sudden death.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...