DANISH Trial design: Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy were randomized to ICD implantation (n = 556) versus usual care (n = 560). Results (p = 0.28)

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

PACT Clinical Trial Commentary Dr Eric Topol Chairman and Professor, Department of Cardiology Director of the Joseph J Jacobs Center for Thrombosis and.

Advertisements

Randomized, double-blind, multicenter, controlled trial.

RALES: Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Purpose To determine whether the aldosterone antagonist spironolactone reduces mortality in patients with.

EP Show – Dec 2003 ICDs – Primary prevention The EP Show: Guidelines and reimbursement at the crossroads: Primary prevention with ICDs Eric Prystowsky.

Therapeutic Hypothermia in Deceased Organ Donors and Kidney-Graft Function R3 김동연 /Prof. 정경환 N Engl J Med 373;5 July 30, 2015.

The AURORA Trial Source: Holdaas H, Holme I, Schmieder RE, et al. Rosuvastatin in diabetic hemodialysis patient. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011;22(7):1335–1341.

(p for noninferiority = 0.01)

PRAGUE-18 Trial design: Patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI were randomized to prasugrel (n = 634) versus ticagrelor (n = 596). Results (p = 0.94)

NORSTENT Trial design: Patients with obstructive coronary artery disease were randomized to a drug-eluting stent (DES) (n = 4,504) versus a bare-metal.

CORAL Trial design: Patients with renal artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease were randomized to renal artery stenting (n = 467) vs.

APEX Trial design: Patients hospitalized with an acute medical illness were randomized to oral betrixaban for days (n = 3,759) versus subcutaneous.

SOCRATES Trial design: Patients with acute ischemic stroke were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive either ticagrelor 180 mg load + 90 mg BID or aspirin.

The IDEAL Study Reference

(CMR vs. guidelines, p < 0.001)

RE-CIRCUIT Trial design: Patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation were randomized to uninterrupted dabigatran 150 mg twice daily.

(p < for group 1 or 2 vs. group 3)

IMPI Trial design: Participants with TB pericarditis and risk for HIV were randomized to prednisolone (n = 706) vs. placebo (n = 694) and to M. indicus.

SAVE Trial design: Patients with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and known CV disease were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either CPAP.

Preventing SCD With a WCD: Reviewing the Results of the VEST Trial

BENEFIT Trial design: Patients with positive serologic tests for T. Cruzi and cardiomyopathy were randomized to benznidazole 300 mg daily for days.

EUCLID Trial design: Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) were randomized to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily (n = 6,930) vs. clopidogrel 75 mg.

ATLANTIC Trial design: Participants with STEMI being transported for primary PCI were randomized in the ambulance to ticagrelor 180 mg (n = 909) vs. placebo.

LEVO-CTS Trial design: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass were randomized to infusion of levosimendan 0.2 µg/kg/min.

(p for noninferiority = )

(pnoninferiority < )

PROACT-4 Trial design: Patients enroute to the hospital with acute chest pain were randomized to point of care troponin testing (n = 305) vs. usual care.

EMPA-REG OUTCOME Trial design: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) at high risk for CV events were randomized to receive in a 1:1:1 fashion either.

INOVATE-HF Trial design: Patients with heart failure (HF) were randomized to device implant for vagus nerve stimulation (n = 436) versus optimal medical.

POSEIDON-DCM Trial design: Patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy were randomized to transendocardial injection of allogenic (n = 18) vs. autologous.

OptiLink HF Trial design: Patients with heart failure who underwent implantation of an ICD were randomized to telemonitoring (n = 505) vs. usual care (n.

Compare-Acute Trial design: STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI were randomized to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization (n.

PARADIGM-HF Trial design: Participants with NYHA class II-IV and LVEF ≤40% were randomized to LCZ mg twice daily (n = 4,187) vs. enalapril 10 mg.

PRECISION Trial design: Patients with arthritis and increased cardiovascular risk were randomized to celecoxib 100 mg twice daily (n = 8,072) vs. ibuprofen.

ALPS Trial design: Patients with adult nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOHCA) and persistent or recurrent VT/VF after ≥1 shock were randomized.

Francisco Leyva et al. JACC 2017;70:

VALUE Trial design: Hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk were randomized to valsartan (n = 7,649) vs. amlodipine (n = 7,596). Results (p =

ANTARCTIC Trial design: Patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing stenting were randomized to tailored antiplatelet therapy (n = 435) versus conventional.

SIGNIFY Trial design: Participants with stable coronary artery disease without clinical heart failure and resting heart rate >70 bpm were randomized to.

SMILE Trial design: NSTEMI patients were randomized to complete revascularization during the index procedure (i.e., 1-stage revascularization; n = 264)

Modified Rankin score 0-2

Belinda Gray et al. JCHF 2013;1:

NIPPON Trial design: Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (6 months; n.

David F. Katz et al. JACEP 2016;j.jacep

TACTICS-HF Trial design: Patients with acute heart failure (reduced or preserved ejection fraction) were randomized to tolvaptan 30 mg at 0, 24, and 48.

FOURIER Trial design: Patients with established cardiovascular disease on statin therapy were randomized to evolocumab 140 mg subcutaneous every 2 weeks.

(p = 0.32 for noninferiority)

AMACING Trial design: Patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing intravascular iodinated contrast administration were randomized to prophylactic hydration.

(p < for noninferiority)

OSLER Trial design: Patients from five phase 2 trials and seven phase 3 trials with evolocumab were invited to participate in the OSLER extension program,

(p for noninferiority < 0.001)

Mahesh Anantha Narayanan et al. JACEP 2017;3:

(p = for noninferiority)

POPE-2 Trial design: Patients with moderate to large pericardial effusion after cardiac surgery were randomized to colchicine 2 mg loading dose, then 1.

CHAMPION Trial design: Patients with recent hospitalization for heart failure were implanted with a pulmonary artery pressure monitor and randomized so.

David F. Katz et al. JACEP 2017;3:20-28

Mahesh Anantha Narayanan et al. JACEP 2017;j.jacep

Age-Standardized Rates of Death from Any Cause According to the Estimated GFR among 1,120,295 Ambulatory Adults Alan S.Go et al. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:

SOLID-TIMI 52 Trial design: Participants within 30 days of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were randomized to darapladib 160 mg daily (n = 6,504) versus.

Primary safety endpoint

Baseline Characteristics of Elderly Participants in the Cardiovascular Health Study,According to Quintiles of Cystatin C Michael G.Shlipak et al N Engl.

Jordan S. Leyton-Mange et al. JACEP 2017;j.jacep

MOMENTUM 3 Trial design: Patients with advanced heart failure were randomized to a centrifugal-flow pump (n = 152) vs. an axial-flow pump (n = 142). Results.

IVUS-XPL Trial design: Patients undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation for long coronary lesions were randomized to IVUS-guided PCI (n = 700) vs. angiography-guided.

(p for noninferiority = 0.01)

MATRIX: Radial vs. Femoral

MOOD-HF Trial design: Patients with chronic systolic heart failure and comorbid depression were randomized to escitalopram (n = 185) vs. placebo (n = 187).

Saadia Sherazi et al. JACEP 2015;1:74-80

Demographic Characteristics of Patients Treated With Statins Versus Those Not Treated With Statins Goldberger JJ, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:

CIRCUS Trial design: Patients with anterior STEMI were randomized to IV cyclosporine 2.5 mg/kg (n = 475) vs. placebo (n = 495) immediately before coronary.

Rethinking Risk Stratification for Nonischemic HF:

Presentation transcript:

DANISH Trial design: Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy were randomized to ICD implantation (n = 556) versus usual care (n = 560). Results (p = 0.28) All-cause mortality: 21.6% of the ICD group versus 23.4% of the control group (p = 0.28) Younger patients (<59 years) appeared to derive greater benefit from ICD implantation versus older patients (p for interaction = 0.009) Sudden cardiac death: 4.3% versus 8.2%; respectively, for ICD versus control (p = 0.005) 23.4 % 21.6 Conclusions Among patients with a nonischemic cardiomyopathy, ICD implantation did not reduce long-term mortality compared with usual care; however, there was suggestion of benefit among younger patients ICD Control Køber L, et al. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1221-30