Factibilidad y resultados de un programa de rehabilitación cardiaca intensiva. Perspectiva del estudio aleatorizado MxM (Más por Menos) / Feasibility and results of an intensive cardiac rehabilitation program. Insights from the MxM (Más por Menos) randomized trial

Introducción y objetivos: Los programas de rehabilitación cardiaca (PRC) engloban intervenciones encaminadas a mejorar el pronóstico de la enfermedad cardiovascular influyendo en la condición física, mental y social de los pacientes, pero no se conoce su duración óptima. Nuestro objetivo es comparar los resultados de un PRC estándar frente a otro intensivo más breve tras un síndrome coronario agudo, mediante el estudio Más por Menos. Métodos: Diseño prospectivo, aleatorizado, abierto, enmascarado a los evaluadores de eventos y multicéntrico (PROBE). Se aleatorizó a los pacientes al PRC estándar de 8 semanas u otro intensivo de 2 semanas con sesiones de refuerzo. Se realizó una visita final 12 meses después, tras la finalización del programa. Se evaluó: adherencia a la dieta, esfera psicológica, hábito tabáquico, tratamiento farmacológico, capacidad funcional, calidad de vida, parámetros cardiometabólicos y antropométricos, eventos cardiovasculares y mortalidad por cualquier causa durante el seguimiento. Resultados: Se analizó a 497 pacientes (media de edad, 57,8±10,0 años; el 87,3% varones; programa intensivo, n=262; estándar, n=235). Las características basales de ambos grupos eran similares. Al año, más del 93% había mejorado en al menos 1 MET el resultado de la ergometría. Además, la adherencia a la dieta mediterránea y la calidad de vida mejoraron significativamente con el PRC, sin diferencias significativas entre grupos. Los eventos cardiovasculares ocurrieron de manera similar en ambos grupos. Conclusiones: La PRC intensiva podría ser tan efectiva como la PRC estándar en lograr la adherencia a las medidas de prevención secundaria y ser una alternativa para algunos pacientes y centros. (AU)

Introduction and objectives: Cardiac rehabilitation programs (CRP) are a set of interventions to improve the prognosis of cardiovascular disease by influencing patients’ physical, mental, and social conditions. However, there are no studies evaluating the optimal duration of these programs. We aimed to compare the results of a standard vs a brief intensive CRP in patients after ST-segment elevation and non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome through the Más por Menos study (More Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs in Less Time). Methods: In this prospective, randomized, open, evaluator-blind for end-point, and multicenter trial (PROBE design), patients were randomly allocated to either standard 8-week CRP or intensive 2-week CRP with booster sessions. A final visit was performed 12 months later, after completion of the program. We assessed adherence to the Mediterranean diet, psychological status, smoking, drug therapy, functional capacity, quality of life, cardiometabolic and anthropometric parameters, cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Results: A total of 497 patients (mean age, 57.8±10.0 years; 87.3% men) were finally assessed (intensive: n=262; standard: n=235). Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. At 12 months, the results of treadmill ergometry improved by ≥ 1 MET in ≥ 93% of the patients. In addition, adherence to the Mediterranean diet and quality of life were significantly improved by CRP, with no significant differences between the groups. The occurrence of cardiovascular events was similar in the 2 groups. Conclusions: Intensive CRP could be as effective as standard CRP in achieving adherence to recommended secondary prevention measures after acute coronary syndrome and could be an alternative for some patients and centers. (AU)

Feasibility and results of an intensive cardiac rehabilitation program. Insights from the MxM (Más por Menos) randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Cardiac rehabilitation programs (CRP) are a set of interventions to improve the prognosis of cardiovascular disease by influencing patients' physical, mental, and social conditions. However, there are no studies evaluating the optimal duration of these programs. We aimed to compare the results of a standard vs a brief intensive CRP in patients after ST-segment elevation and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome through the Más por Menos study (More Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs in Less Time). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, open, evaluator-blind for end-point, and multicenter trial (PROBE design), patients were randomly allocated to either standard 8-week CRP or intensive 2-week CRP with booster sessions. A final visit was performed 12 months later, after completion of the program. We assessed adherence to the Mediterranean diet, psychological status, smoking, drug therapy, functional capacity, quality of life, cardiometabolic and anthropometric parameters, cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 497 patients (mean age, 57.8±10.0 years; 87.3% men) were finally assessed (intensive: n=262; standard: n=235). Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. At 12 months, the results of treadmill ergometry improved by ≥ 1 MET in ≥ 93% of the patients. In addition, adherence to the Mediterranean diet and quality of life were significantly improved by CRP, with no significant differences between the groups. The occurrence of cardiovascular events was similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive CRP could be as effective as standard CRP in achieving adherence to recommended secondary prevention measures after acute coronary syndrome and could be an alternative for some patients and centers. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02619422).

The R820W mutation in the MYBPC3 gene, associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in cats, causes hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and left ventricular non-compaction in humans.

BACKGROUND: The R820W mutation in the MYBPC3 gene has been associated with the development of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in rag-doll cats, but had not been described in humans. AIMS: To describe the phenotype associated with the R820W mutation identified in a human family. METHODS: The R820W was identified by direct sequencing of the MYBPC3 gene in a 47 year old woman with HCM and left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC). Clinical and genetic studies of the R820W mutation were performed in her family. RESULTS: The index patient was homozygous for the mutation and had no additional mutations in the main sarcomeric genes (MYH7, TNNT2, TNNI3, and TPM1). She had HCM with LVNC and normal systolic function. One brother had died suddenly at age 43 years. Another brother diagnosed of LVNC with severe systolic dysfunction and a cardiac arrest was also homozygous for the mutation. One heterozygous 31 year old sister, and three heterozygous sons of the index (ages 14, 20 and 23 years old) were clinically unaffected. The father of the index was apparently healthy and her mother had atrial fibrillation and an electrocardiographic diagnosis of left ventricular hypertrophy at age 86 years. CONCLUSION: The R820W mutation in the MYBPC3 gene, previously associated with HCM in rag-doll cats, causes both HCM and LVNC in homozygous human carriers, with mild or null clinical expression in heterozygous carriers.

Impacto del tipo de hospital en el tratamiento y evolución de los pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del ST / Influence of hospital type on treatment and prognosis in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome

Introducción y objetivos. Las guías de práctica clínica del síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del ST (SCASEST) no valoran la infraestructura hospitalaria y la facilidad de acceso a la sala de hemodinámica. Este estudio analiza la influencia del tipo de hospital, con o sin sala de hemodinámica, en la forma de tratamiento de pacientes con SCASEST y su posible impacto en el pronóstico a medio plazo. Métodos. El GYSCA es un registro multicéntrico (15 hospitales) que analiza la aplicación de las guías en pacientes con SCASEST: 6 con sala de hemodinámica (hospitales centrales) y 9 sin hemodinámica (hospitales comarcales). Se realizó seguimiento clínico al alta y a los 3 y a los 12 meses. Resultados. Se reclutó a 1.133 pacientes consecutivos; 599 (52,9%) en hospitales centrales y 534 (47,1%) en hospitales comarcales. El uso de intervenciones de clase I fue mayor en los centrales (aspirina, clopidogrel, bloqueadores beta, IECA y estatinas; p < 0,01) y se revascularizó a más pacientes durante la hospitalización (el 43 frente al 30%; p < 0,01). El número de pacientes de hospitales comarcales que reingresaron por SCASEST al año fue 5 veces mayor que en los centrales (el 12,8 frente al 2,3%; p < 0,01), y el tipo de hospital fue uno de los predictores de eventos. Conclusiones. Los pacientes que ingresan por SCASEST en hospitales que no disponen de sala de hemodinámica son tratados de forma menos invasiva y con un tratamiento farmacológico menos ajustado a lo recomendado en las guías. Junto con los conocidos factores predictivos del pronóstico, el tipo de hospital puede tener un impacto adicional en la evolución (AU)

Introduction and objectives. Clinical practice guidelines on non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) do not take either hospital infrastructure or the availability of a catheterization laboratory into account. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of hospital type, either with or without a catheterization laboratory, on treatment and medium-term prognosis in patients with NSTEACS. Methods. The GYSCA multicenter study (covering 15 hospitals) investigated the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in patients with NSTEACS at six hospitals with catheterization laboratories (i.e. tertiary-care hospitals; THs) and nine without (i.e. secondary-care hospitals; SHs). Patients were assessed clinically at hospital discharge and after 3 and 12 months. Results. In total, 1133 consecutive patients were recruited: 599 (52.9%) in THs and 534 (47.1%) in SHs. The use of specific class-I interventions (i.e. aspirin, clopidogrel, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins) was more common in THs (P < .01) and more patients in THs underwent revascularization while in hospital (43% vs. 30%; P < .01). The number of SH patients who were readmitted for NSTEACS at 1 year was 5-fold greater than the number of TH patients (12.8% vs. 2.3%; P < .01), and hospital type was a predictor of an adverse event. Conclusions. Patients admitted for NSTEACS to a hospital without a catheterization laboratory were managed less invasively and their drug treatment was less likely to have been modified to match guideline recommendations. In addition to other well-known prognostic factors, hospital type can also have an influence on patient outcomes (AU)

[Influence of hospital type on treatment and prognosis in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome]. / Impacto del tipo de hospital en el tratamiento y evolución de los pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del ST.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines on non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) do not take either hospital infrastructure or the availability of a catheterization laboratory into account. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of hospital type, either with or without a catheterization laboratory, on treatment and medium-term prognosis in patients with NSTEACS. METHODS: The GYSCA multicenter study (covering 15 hospitals) investigated the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in patients with NSTEACS at six hospitals with catheterization laboratories (i.e. tertiary-care hospitals; THs) and nine without (i.e. secondary-care hospitals; SHs). Patients were assessed clinically at hospital discharge and after 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 1133 consecutive patients were recruited: 599 (52.9%) in THs and 534 (47.1%) in SHs. The use of specific class-I interventions (i.e. aspirin, clopidogrel, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and statins) was more common in THs (P< .01) and more patients in THs underwent revascularization while in hospital (43% vs. 30%; P< .01). The number of SH patients who were readmitted for NSTEACS at 1 year was 5-fold greater than the number of TH patients (12.8% vs. 2.3%; P< .01), and hospital type was a predictor of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Patients admitted for NSTEACS to a hospital without a catheterization laboratory were managed less invasively and their drug treatment was less likely to have been modified to match guideline recommendations. In addition to other well-known prognostic factors, hospital type can also have an influence on patient outcomes.