Rationale, design and preliminary results of the GALIPEMIAS study (prevalence and lipid control of familial dyslipidemia in Galicia, northwest Spain).

AIMS: There is little information on the familial nature of dyslipidemias in the Spanish population. This knowledge could have potential diagnostic and treatment implications. The objective of the GALIPEMIAS study was to determine the prevalence of familial dyslipidemia in Galicia, as well as determine the degree of lipid control in the participants. Prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) was also estimated. This paper presents the design, methodology and selected preliminary results. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was performed in the population aged ≥18 years using cluster sampling and then random sampling. A sample of 1000 subjects was calculated and divided into three sequential phases with a specific methodology for each one. Phase I: selection of subjects from the general population and collection of informed consent documents; Phase II: collection of data from the digital clinical history to select subjects with dyslipidemia according to study criteria; Phase III: personal interview, blood analysis, family tree, and definitive diagnosis of dyslipidemia. Prevalence of different diseases and active medication was analysed. Corrected prevalence (to the reference population) of different risk factors and ASCVD was estimated. RESULTS: Phase I participation was 89.5%. We extracted complete information from 93% of the participants (Phase II). According to the study's own criteria, 56.5% (n = 527) of the participants had some form of dyslipidemia and almost 33.7% of them had familial dyslipidemia with autosomal dominant inherit pattern. The corrected prevalence of ASCVD was 5.1% (95% CI 3.1-7.2). CONCLUSIONS: Dyslipidemia was the most prevalent cardiovascular risk factor in our population with an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern in one out of every three dyslipidemia cases. Approximately, 5.1% of the sample population aged ≥18 has suffered an episode of ACVD.

Economic evaluation of complete revascularization versus stress echocardiography-guided revascularization in the STEACS with multivessel disease.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Economic studies may help decision making in the management of multivessel disease in the setting of myocardial infarction. We sought to perform an economic evaluation of CROSS-AMI (Complete Revascularization or Stress Echocardiography in Patients With Multivessel Disease and ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction) randomized clinical trial. METHODS: We performed a cost minimization analysis for the strategies (complete angiographic revascularization [ComR] and selective stress echocardiography-guided revascularization [SelR]) compared in the CROSS-AMI clinical trial (N=306), attributable the initial hospitalization and readmissions during the first year of follow-up, using current rates for health services provided by our health system. RESULTS: The index hospitalization costs were higher in the ComR group than in SelR arm (19 657.9±6236.8 € vs 14 038.7±4958.5 €; P <.001). There were no differences in the costs of the first year of follow-up rehospitalizations between both groups for (ComR 2423.5±4568.0 vs SelR 2653.9±5709.1; P=.697). Total cost was 22 081.3±7505.6 for the ComR arm and 16 692.6±7669.9 for the SelR group (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the CROSS-AMI trial, the initial extra economic costs of the ComR versus SelR were not offset by significant savings during follow-up. SelR seems to be more efficient than ComR in patients with ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease treated by emergent angioplasty. Study registred at ClinicalTrial.gov (Identifier: NCT01179126).

Angiographically Guided Complete Revascularization Versus Selective Stress Echocardiography-Guided Revascularization in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: The CROSS-AMI Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials suggest that complete revascularization in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease is associated with better outcomes than infarct-related artery (IRA)-only revascularization. There are different methods to select non-IRA lesions for revascularization procedures. We assessed the clinical outcomes of complete angiographically guided revascularization versus stress echocardiography-guided revascularization in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS: We performed a randomized clinical trial in patients with multivessel disease who underwent a successful percutaneous coronary intervention of the IRA to test differences in prognosis (composite end point included cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal reinfarction, coronary revascularization, and readmission for heart failure after 12 months of follow-up) between complete angiographically guided revascularization (n=154) or stress echocardiography-guided revascularization (n=152) of the non-IRA lesions in an elective procedure before hospital discharge. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely stopped after the inclusion of 77% of the planned study population. As many as 152 (99%) patients in the complete revascularization group and 44 (29%) patients in the selective revascularization group required a percutaneous coronary intervention procedure of a non-IRA lesion before discharge. The primary end point occurred in 21 (14%) patients of the stress echocardiography-guided revascularization group and 22 (14%) patients of the complete angiographically guided revascularization group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.52-1.72; P=0.85). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, stress echocardiography-guided revascularization may not be significantly different to complete angiographically guided revascularization, thereby reducing the need for elective revascularization before hospital discharge. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01179126.

Primary angioplasty in Northern Galicia: care changes and results following implementation of the PROGALIAM protocol.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze changes in healthcare delivery and results for primary angioplasty at Centro Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña following implementation of the PROGALIAM protocol. METHODS: Observational registry of 1434 patients referred for primary angioplasty between 2003 and 2007. Results under PROGALIAM (May 2005 - December 2007; n=963) were compared with those from the preceding period (January 2003 - April 2005; n=388). RESULTS: After implementing PROGALIAM, there were increases in the number of primary angioplasty procedures (preceding period, 14.4 cases/month; PROGALIAM, 32.2 cases/month), mean patient age (preceding period, 61.3 (11.9) years; PROGALIAM, 64.2 (11.7) years; P<.001), and the percentage of patients referred from peripheral hospitals and treated after normal working hours. Overall median first medical contact-to-balloon time increased (previous period, 106 min; PROGALIAM, 113 min; P=.02), but decreased significantly among patients referred from noninterventional centers (previous period, 171 min; PROGALIAM, 146 min; P<.001). Percentage of cases with an first medical contact-to-balloon time <120 min remained unchanged among interventional-center patients (preceding period, 69%; PROGALIAM, 71%; P=.56) and increased among patients at noninterventional centers, although it remained low in this subgroup (preceding period, 17%; PROGALIAM, 30%; P=.04). Thirty-day mortality (preceding period, 5.2%; PROGALIAM, 6.2%; P=.85) and 1-year mortality (preceding period, 9.5%; PROGALIAM, 10.2%; P=.96) remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of PROGALIAM allowed us to increase the percentage of patients receiving primary angioplasty without jeopardizing the clinical results of this treatment.

Usefulness of the INTERMACS Scale for predicting outcomes after urgent heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the prognostic value of the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) scale in patients undergoing urgent heart transplantation (HT). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 111 patients treated with urgent HT at our institution from April, 1991 to October, 2009. Patients were retrospectively assigned to three levels of the INTERMACS scale according to their clinical status before HT. RESULTS: Patients at the INTERMACS 1 level (n=31) more frequently had ischemic heart disease (P=.03) and post-cardiothomy shock (P=.02) than patients at the INTERMACS 2 (n=55) and INTERMACS 3-4 (n=25) levels. Patients at the INTERMACS 1 level showed higher preoperative catecolamin doses (P=.001), a higher frequency of use of mechanical ventilation (P<.001), intraaortic balloon (P=.002) and ventricular assist devices (P=.002), and a higher frequency of preoperative infection (P=.015). The INTERMACS 1 group also presented higher central venous pressure (P=.02), AST (P=.002), ALT (P=.006) and serum creatinine (P<.001), and lower hemoglobin (P=.008) and creatinine clearance (P=.001). After HT, patients at the INTERMACS 1 level had a higher incidence of primary graft failure (P=.03) and postoperative need for renal replacement therapy (P=.004), and their long-term survival was lower than patients at the INTERMACS 2 (log rank 5.1, P=.023; HR 3.1, IC 95% 1.1-8.8) and INTERMACS 3-4 level (log rank 6.1, p=0.013; HR 6.8, IC 95% 1.2-39.1). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the INTERMACS scale may be a useful tool to stratify postoperative prognosis after urgent HT.

Drug discovery and design for complex diseases through QSAR computational methods.

There is a need for a study of the complex diseases due to their important impact on our society. One of the solutions involves the theoretical methods which are fast and efficient tools that can lead to the discovery of new active drugs specially designed for these diseases. The Quantitative Structure - Activity Relationship models (QSAR) and the complex network theory become important solutions for screening and designing efficient pharmaceuticals by coding the chemical information of the molecules into molecular descriptors. This review presents the most recent studies on drug discovery and design using QSAR of several complex diseases in the fields of Neurology, Cardiology and Oncology.

Prevalence, etiology and outcome of catheterization laboratory false alarms in patients with suspected ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence, causes and outcome of catheterization laboratory false alarms (CLFAs) in a regional primary angioplasty network. METHODS: A prospective registry of 1,662 patients referred for primary angioplasty between January 2003 and August 2008 was reviewed to identify CLFAs (i.e. when no culprit coronary lesion could be found). RESULTS: No culprit coronary lesion could be identified in 120 patients (7.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-8.5%). Of these, 104 (6.3%, 95% CI, 5.1-7.4%) had a discharge diagnosis other than ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 91 (5.5%; 95% CI, 4.3-6.6%) had no significant coronary disease, and 64 (3.8%; 95% CI, 2.9-4.8%) tested negative for cardiac biomarkers. The most frequent alternative diagnoses were: previous Q-wave myocardial infarction (18 cases), nonspecific ST-segment abnormalities (11), pericarditis (10) and transient apical dyskinesia (10). The 30-day mortality rate was similar in patients with and without culprit lesions (5.8% vs. 5.8%; P=.99). The prevalence of CLFAs was slightly higher in patients not previously evaluated by a cardiologist and referred from emergency departments in hospitals without catheterization laboratories than in those referred by cardiologists from emergency departments at hospitals with such facilities (9.5% vs. 6.1%; P=.02; odds ratio=1.64; 95% CI, 1.08-2.5). The prevalence of CLFAs was not significantly higher in patients referred by physicians with out-of-hospital emergency medical services (7.2%; P=.51; odds ratio=1.37; 95% CI, 0.79-2.37). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of CLFAs was 7.2%, with the criterion of no culprit coronary lesion. Our findings suggest that different patterns of referral to catheterization laboratories could account for small variations in the prevalence of CLFAs.

Sudden cardiac death of two heart transplant patients with correctly functioning implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

It is unclear whether the usual criteria for implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators in patients at risk of sudden death can be generalized to heart transplant recipients. We describe sudden death in 2 heart transplant recipients despite correctly functioning implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The scant relevant literature is reviewed. We conclude that implantable cardioverter defibrillators are unlikely to assist heart transplant recipients with severe coronary allograft vasculopathy and poor ventricular systolic function, the group with the highest incidence of sudden death.