No Fate But What We Make: a Case of Full Recovery After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

An 80 years old man suffered a cardiac arrest shortly after arrival to his local health department. Basic Life Support was started promptly and nine minutes later, on evaluation by an Advanced Life Support team, the victim was defibrillated with a 200J shock. When orotracheal intubation was attempted, masseter muscle contraction was noticed: on reevaluation, the victim had pulse and spontaneous breathing.Thirty minutes later, the patient had been transferred to an emergency department. As he complained of chest pain, the ECG showed a ST segment depression in leads V4 to V6 and laboratory tests showed cardiac troponine I slightly elevated. A coronary angiography was performed urgently: significant left main plus three vessel coronary artery disease was disclosed.Eighteen hours after the cardiac arrest, a quadruple coronary artery bypass grafting operation was undertaken. During surgery, a fresh thrombus was removed from the middle left anterior descendent artery. Post-operative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged seven days after the procedure. Twenty four months later, he remains asymptomatic.In this case, the immediate call for the Advanced Life Support team, prompt basic life support and the successful defibrillation, altogether, contributed for the full recovery. Furthermore, the swiftness in the detection and treatment of the acute reversible cause (myocardial ischemia in this case) was crucial for long-term prognosis.

Locally Advanced and Metastatic Prostate Cancer Treated with Intermittent Androgen Monotherapy or Maximal Androgen Blockade: Results from a Randomised Phase 3 Study by the South European Uroncological Group

BACKGROUND: Few randomised studies have compared antiandrogen intermittent hormonal therapy (IHT) with continuous maximal androgen blockade (MAB) therapy for advanced prostate cancer (PCa). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether overall survival (OS) on IHT (cyproterone acetate; CPA) is noninferior to OS on continuous MAB. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phase 3 randomised trial compared IHT and continuous MAB in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PCa. INTERVENTION: During induction, patients received CPA 200 mg/d for 2 wk and then monthly depot injections of a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH; triptoreline 11.25 mg) analogue plus CPA 200 mg/d. Patients whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was <4 ng/ml after 3 mo of induction treatment were randomised to the IHT arm (stopped treatment and restarted on CPA 300 mg/d monotherapy if PSA rose to ≥20 ng/ml or they were symptomatic) or the continuous arm (CPA 200 mg/d plus monthly LHRH analogue). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measurement was OS. Secondary outcomes included cause-specific survival, time to subjective or objective progression, and quality of life. Time off therapy in the intermittent arm was recorded. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We recruited 1045 patients, of which 918 responded to induction therapy and were randomised (462 to IHT and 456 to continuous MAB). OS was similar between groups (p=0.25), and noninferiority of IHT was demonstrated (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.07). There was a trend for an interaction between PSA and treatment (p=0.05), favouring IHT over continuous therapy in patients with PSA ≤1 ng/ml (HR: 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.02). Men treated with IHT reported better sexual function. Among the 462 patients on IHT, 50% and 28% of patients were off therapy for ≥2.5 yr or >5 yr, respectively, after randomisation. The main limitation is that the length of time for the trial to mature means that other therapies are now available. A second limitation is that T3 patients may now profit from watchful waiting instead of androgen-deprivation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Noninferiority of IHT in terms of survival and its association with better sexual activity than continuous therapy suggest that IHT should be considered for use in routine clinical practice.

Coronary Revascularization Induces a Shift From Cardiac Toward Noncardiac Mortality Without Improving Survival in Vascular Surgery Patient

OBJECTIVE: Although evidence has shown that ischemic heart disease (IHD) in vascular surgery patients has a negative impact on the prognosis after surgery, it is unclear whether directed treatment of IHD may influence cause-specific and overall mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic implication of coronary revascularization (CR) on overall and cause-specific mortality in vascular surgery patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery stenosis, or peripheral artery disease in a university hospital in The Netherlands between January 2003 and December 2011 were retrospectively included. Survival estimates were obtained by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1104 patients were included. Adjusted survival analyses showed that IHD significantly increased the risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.87) and cardiovascular death (HR, 1.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.76). Compared with those without CR, patients previously undergoing CR had similar overall mortality (HR, 1.38 vs 1.62; P = .274) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.83 vs 2.02; P = .656). Nonrevascularized IHD patients were more likely to die of IHD (6.9% vs 35.7%), whereas revascularized IHD patients more frequently died of cardiovascular causes unrelated to IHD (39.1% vs 64.3%; P = .018). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the significance of IHD for postoperative survival of vascular surgery patients. CR was associated with lower IHD-related death rates. However, it failed to provide an overall survival benefit because of an increased rate of cardiovascular mortality unrelated to IHD. Intensification of secondary prevention regimens may be required to prevent this shift toward non-IHD-related death and thereby improve life expectancy.