Incidence of stent thrombosis and adverse cardiac events 5 years after sirolimus stent implantation in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The long-term incidence of stent thrombosis (ST) and complications after sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) implantation is still a matter of debate. METHOD: We conducted a systematic follow-up on the day of their 5-year SES implantation anniversary, in a series of consecutive real-world patients treated with a SES. The use of SES implantation was not restricted to "on-label" indications, and target lesions included in-stent restenosis, vein graft, left main stem locations, bifurcations, and long lesions. The Academic Research Consortium criteria were used for ST classification. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty consecutive patients were treated with SES between April and December 2002 in 3 Swiss hospitals. Mean age was 63 +/- 6 years, 78% were men, 20% presented with acute coronary syndrome, and 19% were patients with diabetes. Five-year follow-up was obtained in 98% of eligible patients. Stent thrombosis had occurred in 12 patients (3.6%) [definite 6 (1.8%), probable 1 (0.3%) and possible 5 (1.5%)]. Eighty-one percent of the population was free of complications. Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 74 (21%) patients and were as follows: cardiac death 3%, noncardiac death 4%, myocardial infarction 2%, target lesion revascularization 8%, non-target lesion revascularization target vessel revascularization 3%, coronary artery bypass graft 2%. Non-TVR was performed in 8%. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm the good long-term outcome of patients treated with SES. The incidence of complications and sub acute thrombosis at 5 years in routine clinical practice reproduces the results of prospective randomized trials.

Dépistage des cancers en pratique clinique: une place privilégiée pour le partage de la décision. [Cancer screening in clinical practice: the value of shared decision-making]

Shared decision-making approach to uncertain clinical situations such as cancer screening seems more appropriate than ever. Shared decision making can be defined as an interactive process where physician and patient share all the stages of the decision making process. For patients who wish to be implicated in the management of their health conditions, physicians might express difficulty to do so. Use of patient decision aids appears to improve such process of shared decision making. L'incertitude quant à l'efficacité de certains dépistages de cancers et du traitement en cas de test positif rend l'application du partage de la décision particulièrement appropriée. Le concept du partage de la décision peut être défini comme un processus interactif où le médecin et le patient partagent les étapes du processus de décision. Face aux patients qui désirent être impliqués dans les décisions concernant leur santé, les médecins peinent parfois à le faire. Or, l'utilisation d'outils d'aide à la décision est un moyen efficace de favoriser ce partage de l'information et, si souhaité par le patient, de la décision.

How can we teach EBM in clinical practice? : an analysis of barriers to implementation of on-the-job EBM teaching and learning.

Introduction: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) improves the quality of health care. Courses on how to teach EBM in practice are available, but knowledge does not automatically imply its application in teaching. We aimed to identify and compare barriers and facilitators for teaching EBM in clinical practice in various European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was constructed listing potential barriers and facilitators for EBM teaching in clinical practice. Answers were reported on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from not at all being a barrier to being an insurmountable barrier. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 120 clinical EBM teachers from 11 countries. Lack of time was the strongest barrier for teaching EBM in practice (median 5). Moderate barriers were the lack of requirements for EBM skills and a pyramid hierarchy in health care management structure (median 4). In Germany, Hungary and Poland, reading and understanding articles in English was a higher barrier than in the other countries. Conclusion: Incorporation of teaching EBM in practice faces several barriers to implementation. Teaching EBM in clinical settings is most successful where EBM principles are culturally embedded and form part and parcel of everyday clinical decisions and medical practice.

Recommendations for raloxifene use in daily clinical practice in the Swiss setting.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Raloxifene is the first selective estrogen receptor modulator that has been approved for the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in Europe and in the US. Although raloxifene reduces the risk of invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and in postmenopausal women at high risk for invasive breast cancer, it is approved in that indication in the US but not in the EU. The aim was to characterize the clinical profiles of postmenopausal women expected to benefit most from therapy with raloxifene based on published scientific evidence to date. METHODS: Key individual patient characteristics relevant to the prescription of raloxifene in daily practice were defined by a board of Swiss experts in the fields of menopause and metabolic bone diseases and linked to published scientific evidence. Consensus was reached about translating these insights into daily practice. RESULTS: Through estrogen agonistic effects on bone, raloxifene reduces biochemical markers of bone turnover to premenopausal levels, increases bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, proximal femur, and total body, and reduces vertebral fracture risk in women with osteopenia or osteoporosis with and without prevalent vertebral fracture. Through estrogen antagonistic effects on breast tissue, raloxifene reduces the risk of invasive estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and in postmenopausal women at high risk for invasive breast cancer. Finally, raloxifene increases the incidence of hot flushes, the risk of venous thromboembolic events, and the risk of fatal stroke in postmenopausal women at increased risk for coronary heart disease. Postmenopausal women in whom the use of raloxifene is considered can be categorized in a 2 × 2 matrix reflecting their bone status (osteopenic or osteoporotic based on their BMD T-score by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) and their breast cancer risk (low or high based on the modified Gail model). Women at high risk of breast cancer should be considered for treatment with raloxifene. CONCLUSION: Postmenopausal women between 50 and 70 years of age without climacteric symptoms with either osteopenia or osteoporosis should be evaluated with regard to their breast cancer risk and considered for treatment with raloxifene within the framework of its contraindications and precautions.

Frequency and determinants of using pharmacological enhancement in the clinical practice of in-hospital stroke rehabilitation.

Background: Pharmacological enhancement in stroke rehabilitation (PESR) is promising. Data about its use in clinical practice are missing. Methods: In a prospective, explorative study of four rehabilitation centers, we systematically observed the frequency and determinants of using PESR in consecutive patients. PESR was defined as using agents potentially enhancing post-stroke recovery exclusively to aid rehabilitation without an established indication. Results: 257 (55.4%) of 464 patients had agents potentially enhancing recovery. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) (n = 125, 26.9%), levodopa (n = 114, 24.6%), serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) (n = 52, 11.2%), and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (n = 48, 10.3%) were used most often. SSRI in 102/125 patients and SNRI in 46/52 patients were mostly used for accompanying depressive symptoms. 159 (34.3%) patients had PESR (without an otherwise established indication). In PESR patients, levodopa (n = 102, 64.1%) was used most commonly. PESR was primarily used for aphasia (36.5%) and paresis (25.2%). PESR patients did not differ from non-PESR patients in age, gender and stroke type. However, the utilization rates of PESR differed significantly across centers (2, 4, 38 and 55%). Conclusion: SSRI and SNRI were predominately used for accompanying depression, while levodopa was nearly exclusively used to aid stroke rehabilitation in the absence of an otherwise established indication. The differences in utilization rates for PESR between centers suggest therapeutic uncertainty and indicate the need for additional studies.

Joint Official Positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation on FRAX(®). Executive Summary of the 2010 Position Development Conference on Interpretation and use of FRAX® in clinical practice.

The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) convened the FRAX(®) Position Development Conference (PDC) in Bucharest, Romania, on November 14, 2010, following a two-day joint meeting of the ISCD and IOF on the "Interpretation and Use of FRAX(®) in Clinical Practice." These three days of critical discussion and debate, led by a panel of international experts from the ISCD, IOF and dedicated task forces, have clarified a number of important issues pertaining to the interpretation and implementation of FRAX(®) in clinical practice. The Official Positions resulting from the PDC are intended to enhance the quality and clinical utility of fracture risk assessment worldwide. Since the field of skeletal assessment is still evolving rapidly, some clinically important issues addressed at the PDCs are not associated with robust medical evidence. Accordingly, some Official Positions are based largely on expert opinion. Despite limitations inherent in such a process, the ISCD and IOF believe it is important to provide clinicians and technologists with the best distillation of current knowledge in the discipline of bone densitometry and provide an important focus for the scientific community to consider. This report describes the methodology and results of the ISCD-IOF PDC dedicated to FRAX(®).

Implementation of raltegravir in routine clinical practice: selection criteria for choosing this drug, virologic response rates, and characteristics of failures.

BACKGROUND: Raltegravir (RAL) achieved remarkable virologic suppression rates in randomized-clinical trials, but today efficacy data and factors for treatment failures in a routine clinical care setting are limited. METHODS: First, factors associated with a switch to RAL were identified with a logistic regression including patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study with a history of 3 class failure (n = 423). Second, predictors for virologic outcome were identified in an intent-to-treat analysis including all patients who received RAL. Last observation carried forward imputation was used to determine week 24 response rate (HIV-1 RNA >or= 50 copies/mL). RESULTS: The predominant factor associated with a switch to RAL in patients with suppressed baseline RNA was a regimen containing enfuvirtide [odds ratio 41.9 (95% confidence interval: 11.6-151.6)]. Efficacy analysis showed an overall response rate of 80.9% (152/188), whereas 71.8% (84/117) and 95.8% (68/71) showed viral suppression when stratified for detectable and undetectable RNA at baseline, respectively. Overall CD4 cell counts increased significantly by 42 cells/microL (P < 0.001). Characteristics of failures were a genotypic sensitivity score of the background regimen <or=1, very low RAL plasma concentrations, poor adherence, and high viral load at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Virologic suppression rates in our routine clinical care setting were promising and comparable with data from previously published randomized-controlled trials.