1,720,961 research outputs found
Present criteria for prophylactic ICD implantation: Insights from the EU-CERT-ICD (Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in EUrope) project
No full textBackground: The clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is under debate. It is urgently needed to better identify patients who benefit from prophylactic ICD therapy. The EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD) completed in 2019 will assess this issue. The EU-CERT-ICD is a prospective investigator-initiated non-randomized, controlled, multicenter observational cohort study done in 44 centers across 15 European countries. A total of 2327 patients with heart failure due to ischemic heart disease or dilated cardiomyopathy indicated for primary prophylactic ICD implantation were recruited between 2014 and 2018 (>1500 patients at first ICD implantation, >750 patients non-randomized non-ICD control group). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, and first appropriate shock was co-primary endpoint. At baseline, all patients underwent 12‑lead ECG and Holter-ECG analysis using multiple advanced methods for risk stratification as well as documentation of clinical characteristics and laboratory values. The EU-CERT-ICD data will provide much needed information on the survival benefit of preventive ICD therapy and expand on previous prospective risk stratification studies which showed very good applicability of clinical parameters and advanced risk stratifiers in order to define patient subgroups with above or below average ICD benefit. Conclusion: The EU-CERT-ICD study will provide new and current data about effectiveness of primary prophylactic ICD implantation. The study also aims for improved risk stratification and patient selection using clinical risk markers in general, and advanced ECG risk markers in particular
Rationale and design of the EU-CERT-ICD prospective study: comparative effectiveness of prophylactic ICD implantation
No full textAims: The clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is under debate. The EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD) aims to assess its current clinical value. Methods and results: The EU-CERT-ICD is a prospective investigator-initiated non-randomized, controlled, multicentre observational cohort study performed in 44 centres across 15 European Union countries. We will recruit 2250 patients with ischaemic or dilated cardiomyopathy and a guideline indication for primary prophylactic ICD implantation. This sample will include 1500 patients at their first ICD implantation and 750 patients who did not receive a primary prevention ICD despite having an indication for it (non-randomized control group). The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality; the co-primary endpoint in ICD patients is time to first appropriate shock. Secondary endpoints include sudden cardiac death, first inappropriate shock, any ICD shock, arrhythmogenic syncope, revision procedures, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. At baseline (and prior to ICD implantation if applicable), all patients undergo 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and Holter ECG analysis using multiple advanced methods for risk stratification as well as detailed documentation of clinical characteristics and laboratory values. Genetic biobanking is also organized. As of August 2018, baseline data of 2265 patients are complete. All subjects will be followed for up to 4.5 years. Conclusions: The EU-CERT-ICD study will provide a necessary update about clinical effectiveness of primary prophylactic ICD implantation. This study also aims for improved risk stratification and patient selection using clinical and ECG risk markers
Clinical effectiveness of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: results of the EU-CERT-ICD controlled multicentre cohort study
No full textAims: The EUropean Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary ProphylacTic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (EU-CERT-ICD), a prospective investigator-initiated, controlled cohort study, was conducted in 44 centres and 15 European countries. It aimed to assess current clinical effectiveness of primary prevention ICD therapy. Methods and results: We recruited 2327 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and guideline indications for prophylactic ICD implantation. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Clinical characteristics, medications, resting, and 12-lead Holter electrocardiograms (ECGs) were documented at enrolment baseline. Baseline and follow-up (FU) data from 2247 patients were analysable, 1516 patients before first ICD implantation (ICD group) and 731 patients without ICD serving as controls. Multivariable models and propensity scoring for adjustment were used to compare the two groups for mortality. During mean FU of 2.4 ± 1.1 years, 342 deaths occurred (6.3%/years annualized mortality, 5.6%/years in the ICD group vs. 9.2%/years in controls), favouring ICD treatment [unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.682, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.537–0.865, P = 0.0016]. Multivariable mortality predictors included age, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association class <III, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Adjusted mortality associated with ICD vs. control was 27% lower (HR 0.731, 95% CI 0.569–0.938, P = 0.0140). Subgroup analyses indicated no ICD benefit in diabetics (adjusted HR = 0.945, P = 0.7797, P for interaction = 0.0887) or those aged ≥75 years (adjusted HR 1.063, P = 0.8206, P for interaction = 0.0902). Conclusion: In contemporary ICM/DCM patients (LVEF ≤35%, narrow QRS), primary prophylactic ICD treatment was associated with a 27% lower mortality after adjustment. There appear to be patients with less survival advantage, such as older patients or diabetics
Lack of Prognostic Value of T‐Wave Alternans for Implantable Cardioverter‐Defibrillator Benefit in Primary Prevention
No full textBackground New methods to identify patients who benefit from a primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator (ICD) are needed. T‐wave alternans (TWA) has been shown to associate with arrhythmogenesis of the heart and sudden cardiac death. We hypothesized that TWA might be associated with benefit from ICD implantation in primary prevention. Methods and Results In the EU‐CERT‐ICD (European Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary Prophylactic Implantable Cardioverter‐Defibrillators) study, we prospectively enrolled 2327 candidates for primary prophylactic ICD. A 24‐hour Holter monitor reading was taken from all recruited patients at enrollment. TWA was assessed from Holter monitoring using the modified moving average method. Study outcomes were all‐cause death, appropriate shock, and survival benefit. TWA was assessed both as a contiguous variable and as a dichotomized variable with cutoff points <47 μV and <60 μV. The final cohort included 1734 valid T‐wave alternans samples, 1211 patients with ICD, and 523 control patients with conservative treatment, with a mean follow‐up time of 2.3 years. TWA ≥60 μV was a predicter for a higher all‐cause death in patients with an ICD on the basis of a univariate Cox regression model (hazard ratio, 1.484 [95% CI, 1.024–2.151]; P =0.0374; concordance statistic, 0.51). In multivariable models, TWA was not prognostic of death or appropriate shocks in patients with an ICD. In addition, TWA was not prognostic of death in control patients. In a propensity score–adjusted Cox regression model, TWA was not a predictor of ICD benefit. Conclusions T‐wave alternans is poorly prognostic in patients with a primary prophylactic ICD. Although it may be prognostic of life‐threatening arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in several patient populations, it does not seem to be useful in assessing benefit from ICD therapy in primary prevention among patients with an ejection fraction of ≤35%
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Q waves are the strongest electrocardiographic variable associated with primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator benefit:a prospective multicentre study
No full textAbstract
Aim: The association of standard 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) markers with benefits of the primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has not been determined in the contemporary era. We analysed traditional and novel ECG variables in a large prospective, controlled primary prophylactic ICD population to assess the predictive value of ECG in terms of ICD benefit.
Methods and results: Electrocardiograms from 1477 ICD patients and 700 control patients (EU-CERT-ICD; non-randomized, controlled, prospective multicentre study; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02064192), who met ICD implantation criteria but did not receive the device, were analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. In ICD patients, the co-primary outcome of first appropriate shock was used. Mean follow-up time was 2.4 ± 1.1 years to death and 2.3 ± 1.2 years to the first appropriate shock. Pathological Q waves were associated with decreased mortality in ICD patients [hazard ratio (HR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35–0.84; P < 0.01] and patients with pathological Q waves had significantly more benefit from ICD (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21–0.93; P = 0.03). QTc interval increase taken as a continuous variable was associated with both mortality and appropriate shock incidence, but commonly used cut-off values, were not statistically significantly associated with either of the outcomes.
Conclusion: Pathological Q waves were a strong ECG predictor of ICD benefit in primary prophylactic ICD patients. Excess mortality among Q wave patients seems to be due to arrhythmic death which can be prevented by ICD.EU-CERT-ICD
The EU-CERT-ICD Study Investigators: Elena Arbelo, MD, Axel Bauer MD, Frieder Braunschweig MD PhD, Josep Brugada MD, PhD, David Conen MD, Iwona Cygankiewicz MD, Michael Dommasch MD, Christian Eick, MD, Panagiota Flevari MD, Tim Friede PhD, Jan Galuszka MD, Jim Hansen MD, Robert Hatala MD, Markus Harden PhD, Katerina Hnatkova PhD, Heikki V. Huikuri MD, Juhani M. Junttila, MD PhD, Stefan Kääb MD, Gabriela Kaliska MD, Jaroslaw D. Kasprzak MD, Andreas Katsimardos MD, Milan Kozak MD, Tomasz Kuczejko MD, Andrzej Lubinski MD, Jozef Martinek PhD, Béla Merkely MD, PhD, Tomáš Novotný MD, Marek Malik PhD MD, Peter Perge MD, Burkert Pieske MD, Pyotr Platonov MD PhD, Pawel Ptaczyński, MD, Dariusz Qavoq MD, L. Rotkvić, MD, Zoltan Sallo MD, Simon Schlögl MD, Georg Schmidt MD, Moritz Sinner, MD, Rajeeva Sritharan MSc, Stefan Stefanow MD, Christian Sticherling MD PhD, Jesper Hastrup Svendsen MD DMSc, Martin Svetlosak MD, Janko Szavits-Nossan MD, Milos Taborsky MD, Anton Tuinenburg, MD, Bert Vandenberk MD, Marc A. Vos PhD, Rik Willems MD PhD, Stefan N Willich MD PhD, Christian Wolpert MD, Markus Zabel MD, Ante Anic, MD, Zoran Bakotic MD, Steffen Behrens MD, Dieter Bimmel MD, Sandro Brusich MD, Rüdiger Dissmann MD, Gerian Grönefeld, MD, Przemyzlav Guzik MD, Svetoslav Iovev MD, Zrinka Jurisic MD, Thomas Klingenheben, MD, Nikola Pavlović MD, Joachim Seegers MD, Robert H.G. Schwinger MD, Tchavdar Shalganov MD, Vassil Traykov MD, Vasil Velchev MD
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
