3 research outputs found
Dizziness in an avid cyclist: an unusual presentation of a common problem
No full textPresyncope and syncope are common presentations with a wide range of differential diagnoses; when it occurs primarily on exertion, a cardiovascular cause is more likely. Structural abnormalities and primary rhythm disturbances are the usual culprits in these patients. A 75-year-old gentleman presented with a history of progressive exertional presyncope. His investigations demonstrated normal cardiac structure, function, and rhythm. He underwent an exercise stress test, which demonstrated a significant reduction in peak blood pressure with equivocal electrocardiogram changes and absence of ischaemic symptoms. In view of his age and gender, a computerized tomography coronary angiogram (CTCA) was organized to exclude obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Intriguingly, the CTCA demonstrated a severe proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis. This stenosis was confirmed to be functionally significant using invasive coronary physiology and was treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. At follow-up, there was no recurrence of exertional presyncope and the patient was continuing to return to his baseline function. Presyncope and/or syncope as the sole manifestation of obstructive CAD, in the presence of normal ventricular function and valves, has rarely been reported. Myocardial ischaemia-mediated presyncope and/or syncope may be secondary to numerous mechanisms, which are described in this case report. Revascularization of the functionally significant proximal LAD stenosis resulted in cessation of exertional presyncope in our patient. The long-term outcome of revascularization in patients with presyncope and syncope needs to be further investigated. [Abstract copyright: © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.
Medical therapy and outcomes in REVIVED-BCIS2 and STICHES: an individual patient data analysis.
No full textIn the Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure Trial Extension Study (STICHES), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improved outcomes of patients with ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction receiving medical therapy, whereas in the Revascularization for Ischaemia Ventricular Dysfunction trial (REVIVED-BCIS2), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) did not. The aim of this study was to explore differences in outcomes of participants treated with medical therapy alone in STICHES vs. REVIVED-BCIS2 and to assess the incremental benefit of CABG or PCI. Pooled analysis of adjusted individual participant data from two multicentre randomized trials. All patients had left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary artery disease and received medical therapy. Participants were randomized 1:1 to CABG (STICHES) or PCI (REVIVED-BCIS2). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure over all available follow-up. A total of 1912 participants (88% male, 76% white ethnicity) were included with 98.3% completeness of follow-up for the primary outcome. The median follow-up was 118 months in STICHES and 41 months in REVIVED-BCIS2. Those receiving medical therapy alone in REVIVED-BCIS2 had fewer primary outcome events than those receiving medical therapy alone in STICHES (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.74, P < .001). Patients receiving PCI in REVIVED-BCIS2 were less likely to experience a primary outcome event than those receiving CABG in STICHES. Adjusted outcomes of patients treated with CABG in STICHES were worse than those receiving medical therapy alone in REVIVED-BCIS2. Patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy receiving medical therapy in REVIVED-BCIS2 had better outcomes than those in STICHES, with or without CABG surgery. Further trials comparing CABG, PCI, and medical therapy in this population are warranted. [Abstract copyright: © The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.
Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.
No full textBACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. METHODS: We did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91-1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed. INTERPRETATION: Remote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden
