Amiodarone - waxed and waned and waxed again

Amiodarone has been used as an anti-arrhythmic drug since the 1970s and has an established role in the treatment of ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Although considered to be a class III anti-arrhythmic, amiodarone also has class I, II and IV actions, which gives it a unique pharmacological and anti-arrhythmic profile. Amiodarone is a structural analogue of thyroid hormone and some of its anti-arrhythmic properties and toxicity may be attributable to interactions with nuclear thyroid hormone receptors. The lipid solubility of amiodarone gives it an exceptionally long half-life. Oral amiodarone takes days to work in ventricular tachyarrhythmias, but iv. amiodarone has immediate effect and can be used in life threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Intravenous amiodarone administered after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation improves survival to hospital admission. Many survivors of myocardial infarction (MI) die during the subsequent year, probably due to ventricular arrhythmia. Amiodarone reduces sudden death after MI and this benefit is predominantly observed in patients with preserved cardiac function. Sudden cardiac death, predominantly due to ventricular arrhythmias, is also commonly seen in patients with heart failure. The Grupo de Estudio de la Sobrevida en lsuficiencia Cardiaca en Argentina (GESICA) and Estudio Piloto Argentino de Muerte Subita y Amiodarona (EPAMSA) trials showed survival benefit of amiodarone in heart failure, whereas Congestive Heart Failure-Survival Trial of Anti-arrhythmic Therapy (CHF-STAT) did not. Subsequent meta-analysis established a survival benefit of amiodarone in heart failure. Implanted Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICDs) also give survival benefit to patients at risk of sudden death. In patients with a history of ventricular fibrillation or haemodynamically-compromising ventricular tachycardia, ICDs have been shown to be superior to anti-arrhythmic drugs, principally amiodarone. Further analysis has been undertaken to ascertain which patients are most likely to benefit from ICDs, as these are more expensive than treatment with amiodarone. Patients with severely depressed ejection fractions should be the first to be considered for ICDs. A new indication for amiodarone is atrial fibrillation or flutter. Amiodarone is effective in chronic and recent onset atrial fibrillation and orally or iv. for atrial fibrillation after heart surgery. In atrial fibrillation amiodarone is more than or equi-effective with flecainide, quinidine, racemic sotalol, propafenone and diltiazem and therefore should be considered for first line therapy. Amiodarone is also safe and effective in controlling refractory tachyarrhythmias in infants and is safe after cardiac surgery.

Clopidogrel: A CURE in acute coronary syndromes? (A Key Paper Evaluation)

The standard approach to preventing acute coronary syndromes (ACSs)has been to inhibit platelet aggregation with aspirin and to inhibit blood coagulation with low molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). Even with this combination there is still a substantial short and long-term cardiovascular risk. The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial [1] compared clopidogrel plus aspirin against aspirin alone in patients with ACSs. The clopidogrel regimen was a loading dose of 300 mg p.o. followed by 75 mg/day and the recommended dose of aspirin was 75 - 325 mg/day. The first primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke and this occurred significantly less often in the clopidogrel than the placebo group (9.3 vs. 11.4%). Although there were more clopidogrel patients with life-threatening bleeding (clopidogrel 2.2%, placebo 1.8%), this represented GI haemorrhages and bleeding at sites of arterial puncture rather than fatal bleeding. This trial suggests a role for clopidogrel in the long-term treatment of ACSs

A case report of acute heart failure caused by a patient delaying taking his diuretic medication

Acute heart failure is a life-threatening medical emergency, most commonly occurring as an immediate or delayed complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or resulting from severe hypertension or valvular defects (stenosis or incompetence). Occasionally it is caused by patients' non-compliance with medication orders. In this case the patient had a history of three previous AMIs, controlled hypertension, and controlled congestive heart failure (CHF) for which he took two 40mg frusemide tablets (a very potent oral diuretic) each morning. Because he had experienced bladder discomfort during the latter stages of previous appointments he decided to delay taking the diuretic until after his appointment an acute heart failure ensued.

Chest pain in the dental surgery: A brief review and practical points in diagnosis and management

If a dental patient develops chest pain it must always be managed promptly and properly, i.e., the practitioner immediately stops the procedure and, being aware of the patients's medical history, questions the patient regarding the nature of the pain to help determine the likely diagnosis. It will most likely be a manifestation of coronary artery disease (synonymous with ischaemic heart disease), i.e., angina pectoris or acute myocardial infarction, most usually the former. Angina will usually resolve with proper intervention whereas up to about one-half of myocardial infarction cases will develop cardiac arrest, mostly in the first few hours, and this will be fatal in up to two-thirds of cases. As health care professions, dental practitioners have an inherent duty of care to be able to initiate appropriate care if such a medical emergency occurs.

Genetics of Serum Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfate and Its Relationship to Insulin in a Population-Based Cohort of Twin Subjects

Previous studies have shown a significant effect of insulin administration on serum dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S) concentration and its metabolic rate, with evidence for the effect in men, but not in women. This could lead to differences in the sources of variation in serum DHEA-S between men and women and in its covariation with insulin concentration. This study aimed to test whether these hypotheses were supported in a sample of healthy adult twins. Serum DHEA-S (n=2287) and plasma insulin (n=2436) were measured in samples from adult male and female twins recruited through the Australian Twin Registry. Models of genetic and environmental sources of variation and covariation were tested against the data. DHEA-S showed substantial genetic effects in both men and women after adjustment for covariates, including sex, age, body mass index, and time since the last meal. There was no significant phenotypic or genetic correlation between DHEA-S and insulin in either men or women. Despite the experimental evidence for insulin infusion producing a reduction in serum DHEA-S and some effect of meals on the observed DHEA-S concentration, there were no associations between insulin and DHEA-S at the population level. Variations in DHEA-S are due to age, sex, obesity, and substantial polygenic genetic influences.

Vascular dysfunction and heart failure: Epiphenomenon or etiologic agent?

Endothelial function plays a key role in the local regulation of vascular tone. Alterations in endothelial function may result in impaired release of endothelium-derived relaxing factors or increased release of endothelium-derived contracting factors. Heart failure may impair endothelial function by means of reduced synthesis and release of nitric oxide (NO) or by increased degradation of NO and increased production of endothelin-1. Endothelial dysfunction may worsen heart function by means of peripheral effects, causing increased afterload and central effects such as myocardial ischemia and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS)-induced detrimental effects. Evidence from clinical studies has suggested that there is a correlation between decreased endothelial function and increasing severity of congestive heart failure (CHF). Treatments that improve heart function may also improve endothelial dysfunction. The relationship between endothelial dysfunction and heart failure may be masked by the stage of endothelial dysfunction, the location of vessels being tested, and the state of endothelial-dependent vasodilatation response.

Usefulness of clinical risk markers and ischemic threshold to stratify risk in patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery

The risk of cardiac events in patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery is dependent on their clinical characteristics and the results of stress testing. The purpose of this study was to develop a composite approach to defining levels of risk and to examine whether different approaches to prophylaxis influenced this prediction of outcome. One hundred forty-five consecutive patients (aged 68 +/- 9 years, 79 men) with >1 clinical risk variable were studied with standard dobutamine-atropine stress echo before major noncardiac surgery. Risk levels were stratified according to the presence of ischemia (new or worsening wall motion abnormality), ischemic threshold (heart rate at development of ischemia), and number of clinical risk variables. Patients were followed for perioperative events (during hospital admission) and death or infarction over the subsequent 16 10 months. Ten perioperative events occurred in 105 patients who proceeded to surgery (10%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5% to 17%), 40 being cancelled because of cardiac or other risk. No ischemia was identified in 56 patients, 1 of whom (1.8%) had a perioperative infarction. Of the 49 patients with ischemia, 22 (45%) had 1 or 2 clinical risk factors; 2 (9%, 95% CI 1% to 29%) had events. Another 15 patients had a high ischemic threshold and 3 or 4 risk factors; 3 (20%, 95% Cl 4% to 48%) had events. Twelve patients had a low ischemic threshold and 3 or 4 risk factors; 4 (33%, 95% CI 10% to 65%) had events. Preoperative myocardial revascularization was performed in only 3 patients, none of whom had events. Perioperative and long-term events occurred despite the use of beta blockers; 7 of 41 eta blocker-treated patients had a perioperative event (17%, 95% CI 7% to 32%); these treated patients were at higher anticipated risk than untreated patients (20 +/- 24% vs 10 +/- 19%, p = 0.02). The total event rate over late follow-up was 13%, and was predicted by dobutamine-atropine stress echo results and heart rate response. (C) 2002 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Quality of care of patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes

Background: Measurement and improvement of quality of care is a priority issue in health care. Patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) constitute a high-risk population whose care, if shown to be suboptimal on the basis of available research evidence, may benefit from quality improvement interventions. Aim: To evaluate the quality of in-hospital care for patients with ACS, using explicit quality indicators. Methods: Retrospective case note review was undertaken of 397 patients admitted to three teaching hospitals in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, between 1 October 2000 and 17 April 2001. The main out-come measures were 12 process-of-care quality indicators, calculated as either: (i) the proportion of all patients who received specific interventions or (ii) the proportion of ideal patients who received -specific interventions (i.e. patients with clear indi-cations and lacking contraindications). Results: Quality indicators with values above 80% included: (i) patient selection for thrombolysis (100%) and discharge prescription of beta-blockers (84%), (ii) antiplatelet agents (94%) and (iii) lipid-lowering agents (82%). Indicators with values between 50% and 80% included: (i) timely per-formance of electrocardiogram (ECG) on admission (61%), (ii) early coronary angiography (75%), (iii) measurement of serum lipids (71%) and (iv) discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (73%). Indicators with values <50% included: (i) timely administration of thrombolysis (35%), (ii) non-invasive risk assessment (23%) and (ii) formal in-hospital and post-hospital cardiac rehabilitation (47% and 7%, respectively). Conclusion: There were delays in performing ECG and administering thrombolysis to patients who presented to emergency departments with ACS. Improvement is warranted in use of non-invasive procedures for identifying high-risk patients who may benefit from coronary revascularization as well as use of serum lipid measurements, ACE inhibitors and cardiac rehabilitation.

Cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with average cholesterol levels and established ischaemic heart disease: is it cost-effective?

Objective: To measure the cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with established ischaemic heart disease and average baseline cholesterol levels. Design: Prospective economic evaluation within a double-blind randomised trial (Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease [LIPID]), in which patients with a history of unstable angina or previous myocardial infarction were randomised to receive 40 mg of pravastatin daily or matching placebo. Patients and setting: 9014 patients aged 35-75 years from 85 centres in Australia and New Zealand, recruited from June 1990 to December 1992. Main outcome measures: Cost per death averted, cost per life-year gained, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, calculated from measures of hospitalisations, medication use, outpatient visits, and quality of life. Results: The LIPID trial showed a 22% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 6 years, hospital admissions for coronary heart disease and coronary revascularisation were reduced by about 20%. Over this period, pravastatin cost $A4913 per patient, but reduced total hospitalisation costs by $A1385 per patient and other long-term medication costs by $A360 per patient. In a subsample of patients, average quality of life was 0.98 (where 0 = dead and 1 = normal good health); the treatment groups were not significantly different. The absolute reduction in all-cause mortality was 3.0% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.4%), and the incremental cost was $3246 per patient, resulting in a cost per life saved of $107730 (95% Cl, $68626-$209881) within the study period. Extrapolating long-term survival from the placebo group, the undiscounted cost per life-year saved was $7695 (and $10 938 with costs and life-years discounted at an annual rate of 5%). Conclusions: Pravastatin therapy for patients with a history of myocardial infarction or unstable angina and average cholesterol levels reduces all-cause mortality and appears cost effective compared with accepted treatments in high-income countries.

Effects of the vasopeptidase inhibitor, omapatrilat, in 723 patients with coronary heart disease

Introduction Among individuals with a history of myocardial infarction (MI), higher levels of blood pressure (BP) are associated with increased long-term risks of death from coronary heart disease. Treatment with a BP-lowering regimen, based on omapatrilat may result in greater clinical benefits than treatment with a regimen based on a regular angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor because of more favourable effects on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Methods Seven hundred and twenty-three clinically stable patients with a history of MI or unstable angina, and a mean entry BP of 134/77 mmHg, were randomised to six months treatment with omapatrilat 40 mg, omapatrilat 20 mg, or matching placebo. Results After six months, mean BP levels (systolic/diastolic) in the omapatrilat 40 mg group were reduced by 4.3/ 2.9 mmHg (95% confidence interval 1.3 to 7.2/1.2 to 4.6). Mean BP levels in the omapatrilat 20 mg group were reduced by 4.6/1.0 mmHg (1.6 to 7.6/-0.7 to 2.6) in comparison with the placebo group. Both doses of omapatrilat also produced significant decreases in plasma ACE activity and significant increases in levels of plasma renin activity, atrial natriuretic peptide, endothelin and homocysteine (p

Angiotensin AT-1 receptor antagonism: complementary or alternative to ACE inhibition in cardiovascular and renal disease

Both angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and AT-1 receptor antagonists reduce the effects of angiotensin II, however they may have different clinical effects. This is because the ACE inhibitors, but not the AT-1 receptor antagonists, increase the levels of substance P, bradykinin and tissue plasminogen activator. The AT-1 receptor antagonists, but not the ACE inhibitors, are capable of inhibiting the effects of angiotensin II produced by enzymes other than ACE. On the basis of the present clinical trial evidence, AT-1 receptor antagonists, rather than the ACE inhibitors, should be used to treat hypertension associated with left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. Both groups of drugs are useful when hypertension is not complicated by LV hypertrophy, and in diabetes. In the treatment of diabetes with or without hypertension, there is good clinical support for the use of either an ACE inhibitor or an AT-1 receptor antagonist. ACE inhibitors are recommended in the treatment of renal disease that is not associated with diabetes, after myocardial infarction when left ventricular dysfunction is present, and in heart failure. As the incidence of cough is much lower with the AT-1 receptor antagonists, these can be substituted for ACE inhibitors in patients with hypertension or heart failure who have persistent cough. Preliminary studies suggest that combining an AT-1 receptor antagonist with an ACE inhibitor may be more effective than an ACE inhibitor alone in the treatment of hypertension, diabetes with hypertension, renal disease without diabetes and heart failure. However, further trials are required before combination therapy can be recommended in these conditions.