975 resultados para Gospel According to St. Matthew


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

AIM The aim of this study was to evaluate whether coronary artery disease (CAD) severity exerts a gradient of risk in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 445 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI were included into a prospective registry between 2007 and 2012. The preoperative SYNTAX score (SS) was determined from baseline coronary angiograms. In case of revascularization prior to TAVI, residual SS (rSS) was also determined. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients without CAD (n = 158), patients with low SS (0-22, n = 207), and patients with high SS (SS >22, n = 80). The pre-specified primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, CAD severity was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint (no CAD: 12.5%, low SS: 16.1%, high SS: 29.6%; P = 0.016). This was driven by differences in cardiovascular mortality (no CAD: 8.6%, low SS: 13.6%, high SS: 20.4%; P = 0.029), whereas the risk of stroke (no CAD: 5.1%, low SS: 3.3%, high SS: 6.7%; P = 0.79) and MI (no CAD: 1.5%, low SS: 1.1%, high SS: 4.0%; P = 0.54) was similar across the three groups. Patients with high SS received less complete revascularization as indicated by a higher rSS (21.2 ± 12.0 vs. 4.0 ± 4.4, P < 0.001) compared with patients with low SS. High rSS tertile (>14) was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint at 1 year (no CAD: 12.5%, low rSS: 16.5%, high rSS: 26.3%, P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS Severity of CAD appears to be associated with impaired clinical outcomes at 1 year after TAVI. Patients with SS >22 receive less complete revascularization and have a higher risk of cardiovascular death, stroke, or MI than patients without CAD or low SS.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

by Jos. Krauskopf and Henry Berkowitz

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

We study the decision process in a group dictator game in which three subjects can distribute an initial endowment between themselves and a group of recipients. The experiment consists of two stages; first, individuals play a standard dictator game. Second, individuals are randomly matched into groups of three and communicate via instant messaging regarding the decision in the group dictator game. In contrast to former studies our results show that group decisions do not differ from individual decisions in the dictator game. Furthermore, the analysis of the chat history reveals that players make proposals according to their preferences as revealed in the single dictator game and that these proposals in groups drive the final allocation.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

by Lazare Saminsky

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-2.56; P=0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67-2.10; P=0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.33; P=0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49-3.41; P=0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39-1.25; P=0.23, in nondiabetics). CONCLUSIONS In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

We developed a model to calculate a quantitative risk score for individual aquaculture sites. The score indicates the risk of the site being infected with a specific fish pathogen (viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV); infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus, Koi herpes virus), and is intended to be used for risk ranking sites to support surveillance for demonstration of zone or member state freedom from these pathogens. The inputs to the model include a range of quantitative and qualitative estimates of risk factors organised into five risk themes (1) Live fish and egg movements; (2) Exposure via water; (3) On-site processing; (4) Short-distance mechanical transmission; (5) Distance-independent mechanical transmission. The calculated risk score for an individual aquaculture site is a value between zero and one and is intended to indicate the risk of a site relative to the risk of other sites (thereby allowing ranking). The model was applied to evaluate 76 rainbow trout farms in 3 countries (42 from England, 32 from Italy and 2 from Switzerland) with the aim to establish their risk of being infected with VHSV. Risk scores for farms in England and Italy showed great variation, clearly enabling ranking. Scores ranged from 0.002 to 0.254 (mean score 0.080) in England and 0.011 to 0.778 (mean of 0.130) for Italy, reflecting the diversity of infection status of farms in these countries. Requirements for broader application of the model are discussed. Cost efficient farm data collection is important to realise the benefits from a risk-based approach.