Time filter

Source Type

Harris K.M.,Abbott Laboratories | Braverman A.C.,University of Washington | Eagle K.A.,University of Michigan | Woznicki E.M.,University of Michigan | And 12 more authors.
Circulation | Year: 2012

Background-Acute aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) is an important subgroup of aortic dissection, and controversy surrounds appropriate management. Methods and Results-Patients with acute aortic syndromes in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (1996-2011) were evaluated to examine differences between patients (based on the initial imaging test) with IMH or classic dissection (AD). Of 2830 patients, 178 had IMH (64 type A [42%], 90 type B [58%], and 24 arch). Patients with IMH were older and presented with similar symptoms, such as severe pain. Patients with type A IMH were less likely to present with aortic regurgitation or pulse deficits and were more likely to have periaortic hematoma and pericardial effusion. Although type A IMH and AD were managed medically infrequently, type B IMH were more frequently treated medically. Overall in-hospital mortality was not statistically different for type A IMH compared to AD (26.6% versus 26.5%; P=0.998); type A IMH managed medically had significant mortality (40.0%), although less than classic AD (61.8%; P=0.195). Patients with type B IMH had a hospital mortality that was less but did not differ significantly (4.4% versus 11.1%; P=0.062) from classic AD. One-year mortality was not significantly different between AD and IMH. Conclusions-Acute IMH has similar presentation to classic AD but is more frequently complicated with pericardial effusions and periaortic hematoma. Patients with IMH have a mortality that does not differ statistically from those with classic AD. A small subgroup of type A IMH patients are managed medically and have a significant in-hospital mortality. © 2012 American Heart Association, Inc. Source

Liaw Y.-F.,Chang Gung University | Sheen I.-S.,Chang Gung University | Lee C.-M.,Chang Gung University | Akarca U.S.,Ege University | And 15 more authors.
Hepatology | Year: 2011

Data are limited on the safety and effectiveness of oral antivirals other than lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil for treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in patients with decompensated liver disease. This Phase 2, double-blind study randomized 112 patients with CHB and decompensated liver disease to receive either tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF; n = 45), emtricitabine (FTC)/TDF (fixed-dose combination; n = 45), or entecavir (ETV; n = 22). The primary endpoint was safety; more specifically, tolerability failure (adverse events resulting in permanent treatment discontinuation) and confirmed serum creatinine increase ≥0.5 mg/dL from baseline or confirmed serum phosphorus <2 mg/dL. Patients with insufficient viral suppression (e.g., confirmed HBV DNA ≥400 copies/mL at week 8 or 24) could begin open-label FTC/TDF but were considered failures in this interim week 48 analysis for efficacy endpoints. Tolerability failure was infrequent across arms: 6.7% TDF, 4.4% FTC/TDF, and 9.1% ETV (P = 0.622) as were confirmed renal parameters meeting threshold 8.9%, 6.7%, and 4.5% (P = 1.000), respectively. Six patients died (none considered related to study drug) and six received liver transplants (none had HBV recurrence). The adverse event and laboratory profiles were consistent with advanced liver disease and complications, with no unexpected safety signals. At week 48, HBV DNA was <400 copies/mL (69 IU/mL) in 70.5% (TDF), 87.8% (FTC/TDF), and 72.7% (ETV) of patients. Proportions with normal alanine aminotransferase were: 57% (TDF), 76% (FTC/TDF), and 55% (ETV). Hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) loss/seroconversion occurred in 21%/21% (TDF), 27%/13% (FTC/TDF), and 0%/0% (ETV). Child-Turcotte-Pugh and Modification for End-stage Liver Disease scores improved in all groups. Conclusion: All treatments were well tolerated in patients with decompensated liver disease due to CHB with improvement in virologic, biochemical, and clinical parameters. © 2010 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Source

Harris K.M.,Abbott Laboratories | Strauss C.E.,Abbott Laboratories | Strauss C.E.,University of Minnesota | Eagle K.A.,University of Michigan | And 10 more authors.
Circulation | Year: 2011

BACKGROUND: In acute aortic dissection, delays exist between presentation and diagnosis and, once diagnosed, definitive treatment. This study aimed to define the variables associated with these delays. METHODS AND RESULTS-: Acute aortic dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and January 2007 were evaluated for factors contributing to delays in presentation to diagnosis and in diagnosis to surgery. Multiple linear regression was performed to determine relative delay time ratios (DTRs) for individual correlates. The median time from arrival at the emergency department to diagnosis was 4.3 hours (quartile 1-3, 1.5-24 hours; n=894 patients) and from diagnosis to surgery was 4.3 hours (quartile 1-3, 2.4-24 hours; n=751). Delays in acute aortic dissection diagnosis occurred in female patients; those with atypical symptoms that were not abrupt or did not include chest, back, or any pain; patients with an absence of pulse deficit or hypotension; or those who initially presented to a nontertiary care hospital (all P<0.05). The largest relative DTRs were for fever (DTR=5.11; P<0.001) and transfer from nontertiary hospital (DTR=3.34; P<0.001). Delay in time from diagnosis to surgery was associated with a history of previous cardiac surgery, presentation without abrupt or any pain, and initial presentation to a nontertiary care hospital (all P<0.001). The strongest factors associated with operative delay were prolonged time from presentation to diagnosis (DTR=1.35; P<0.001), race other than white (DTR=2.25; P<0.001), and history of coronary artery bypass surgery (DTR=2.81; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS-: Improved physician awareness of atypical presentations and prompt transport of acute aortic dissection patients could reduce crucial time variables. © 2011 American Heart Association, Inc. Source

Bossone E.,University of Salerno | Corteville D.C.,University of Michigan | Harris K.M.,Abbott Laboratories | Suzuki T.,University of Tokyo | And 11 more authors.
Circulation | Year: 2013

BACKGROUND - Stroke is a highly dreaded complication of type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD). However, little data exist on its incidence and association with prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS - We evaluated 2202 patients with TAAAD (mean age 62±14 years, 1487 [67.5%] men) from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection to determine the incidence and prognostic impact of stroke in TAAAD. Stroke was present at arrival in 132 (6.0%) patients with TAAAD. These patients were older (65±12 versus 62±15 years; P=0.002) and more likely to have hypertension (86% versus 71%; P=0.001) or atherosclerosis (29% versus 22%; P=0.04) than patients without stroke. Chest pain at arrival was less common in patients with stroke (70% versus 82%; P<0.001), and patients with stroke presented more often with syncope (44% versus 15%; P<0.001), shock (14% versus 7%; P=0.005), or pulse deficit (51% versus 29%; P≤0.001). Arch vessel involvement was more frequent among patients with stroke (68% versus 37%; P<0.001). They had less surgical management (74% versus 85%; P<0.001). Hospital stay was significantly longer in patients with stroke (median 17.9 versus 13.3 days; P<0.001). In-hospital complications, such as hypotension, coma, and malperfusion syndromes, and in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.65) were higher among patients with stroke. Among hospital survivors, follow-up mortality was similar between groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-2.89). CONCLUSIONS - Stroke occurred in >1 of 20 patients with TAAAD and was associated with increased in-hospital morbidity but not long-term mortality. Whether aggressive early invasive interventions will reduce negative outcomes remains to be evaluated in future studies. © 2013 American Heart Association, Inc. Source

Pape L.A.,University of Massachusetts Medical School | Awais M.,University of Michigan | Woznicki E.M.,University of Michigan | Suzuki T.,University of Tokyo | And 13 more authors.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | Year: 2015

Background Diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of acute aortic dissection (AAS) are changing. Objectives This study examined 17-year trends in the presentation, diagnosis, and hospital outcomes of AAD from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Methods Data from 4,428 patients enrolled at 28 IRAD centers between December 26, 1995, and February 6, 2013, were analyzed. Patients were divided according to enrollment date into 6 equal groups and by AAD type: A (n = 2,952) or B (n = 1,476). Results There was no change in the presenting complaints of severe or worst-ever pain for type A and type B AAD (93% and 94%, respectively), nor in the incidence of chest pain (83% and 71%, respectively). Use of computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of type A increased from 46% to 73% (p < 0.001). Surgical management for type A increased from 79% to 90% (p < 0.001). Endovascular management of type B increased from 7% to 31% (p < 0.001). Type A in-hospital mortality decreased significantly (31% to 22%; p < 0.001), as surgical mortality (25% to 18%; p = 0.003). There was no significant trend in in-hospital mortality in type B (from 12% to 14%). Conclusions Presenting symptoms and physical findings of AAD have not changed significantly. Use of chest CT increased for type A. More patients in both groups were managed with interventional procedures: surgery in type A and endovascular therapy in type B. A significant decrease in overall in-hospital mortality was seen for type A but not for type B. © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Source

Discover hidden collaborations