Author Interviews, Clots - Coagulation, Diabetes, Heart Disease, JACC / 12.08.2016
Intracoronary Antiplatelet Abciximab Bolus May Improve Outcomes of Primary PCI in STEMI patients with Diabetes
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
Raffaele Piccolo, MD
Department of Cardiology
Bern University Hospital
University of Bern
Bern, Switzerland
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Over the past two decades, the prevalence of diabetes mellitus has doubled in Western countries and future projections are even worse by showing a 55% increase by 2035 when approximately 592 million of people are expected to live with diabetes all over the world.
Acute myocardial infarction still represents the most common diabetes-related complication and its occurrence is associated with a higher risk of mortality. Timely recanalization of the occluded coronary vessel with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) represents the therapy of choice for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
Our study investigated whether the direct application of an intracoronary bolus of abciximab, which is an antiplatelet drug blocking the glycoprotein IIb/III a receptor, at the time of primary PCI improves the outcomes at 1-year follow-up compared with the standard intravenous route. The study was in individual patient-level pooled analysis of 3 randomized trials including 2,470 patients, of whom 473 (19%) had diabetes.












Dr. Sunita Sah[/caption]
Sunita Sah MD PhD
Management & Organizations
Johnson Graduate School of Management
Cornell University
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Sah: Physicians often recommend the treatment they specialize in, e.g., surgeons are more likely to recommend surgery than non-surgeons. Results from an observational study and a randomized controlled laboratory experiment found that when physicians revealed their bias toward their own specialty, patients were more likely to report increased trust in the physician’s expertise and take the treatment in accordance with the physician’s specialty.
Dr. Giovanni Esposito[/caption]
Giovanni Esposito MD, PhD
Associate Professor of Cardiology
Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences
Federico II University, Naples
Napoli - Italy and
Giuseppe Gargiulo, MD
PhD Student
Federico II University of Naples, Italy
Dr. Jeffrey Schussler[/caption]
Jeffrey M. Schussler, MD, FACC, FSCAI, FSCCT, FACP
Baylor Scott & White Health Care System
Cardiology: Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Tx
Medical Director: CVICU Hamilton Heart and Vascular Hospital
Professor of Medicine: Texas A&M School of Medicine
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Schussler: For the past few years, there has been an increased interest in performing coronary catheterization through the wrist. This is a technique that has been done (with great success and low complication rate) in other countries for years, with adoption rates >90% in some places. The US has been slower to adopt performing catheterization from the wrist, but the rate of using this approach has grown tremendously in the last 5 years. While less than 5% of all interventions were done using radial access previously, it now appraches 30% nationally. This increased rate of adoption been spurred on by studies which have shown lower incidences of complications, as well as some mortality benefit, and in particular in those patients who are highest risk for complications.
Dr. Nombela Franco[/caption]
Luis Nombela-Franco, MD, PhD
Structural cardiology program.
Interventional Cardiology department.
Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Cardiovascular Institute
Madrid, Spain
(Dr. Nombela-Franco, has a special interest in interest on percutaneous treatment of structural heart disease and coronary interventions with special focus on chronic total occlusion)
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Nombela-Franco: In-hospital infections are one of the most common complications that may occur following medical and surgical admissions, significantly impacted length of hospital stay, costs and clinical outcomes. In addition, approximately one third of hospital-acquired infections are preventable.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is currently the standard of care for symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed at high surgical risk or inoperable. Patients undergoing TAVR have several comorbidities and the invasive (although less invasive the surgical treatment) nature of the procedure and peri-operative care confers a high likelihood in-hospital infections in such patients. This study analyzed the incidence, predictive factors and impact of in-hospital infections in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
Dr. Mark Cohen[/caption]
Mark E. Cohen, PhD
Statistical Manager
Continuous Quality Improvement
Division of Research and Optimal Patient Care
American College of Surgeons
Chicago, IL
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Cohen: The ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator (built from 2.7 million patient records from nearly 600 hospitals) has been widely adopted as a decision aid and informed consent tool by surgeons and patients. Predictive accuracy can be assessed in terms of discrimination, calibration, and combined discrimination and calibration. In this study, we focused primarily on calibration. Calibration refers to the consistency of agreement between observed and predicted risk across the range of predicted risk. One would not want, for example, a model that dramatically overestimates risk for low-risk patients and underestimates risk for high-risk patients – this sort of systematic error, if of sufficient magnitude, would make a risk calculator unacceptable for clinical use. We also assessed the potential benefits of statistical recalibration using restricted cubic splines.
MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings?
Dr. Cohen: Without recalibration, the Risk Calculator was shown to have excellent calibration, though there was, at times, a slight tendency for predicted risk to be overestimated for lowest- and highest-risk patients and underestimated for moderate-risk patients. After recalibration this distortion was eliminated.
Dr. Josefin Segelman[/caption]
Josefin Segelman MD, PhD
Senior consultant colorectal surgeon
Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery
Karolinska Institutet
Ersta Hospital
Stockholm Sweden
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Dr. Segelman: Hormonal factors influence the development of colorectal cancer. Observational studies and clinical trials have reported a protective effect of hormone replacement therapy and oral contraceptives. Oophorectomy alters endogenous levels of sex hormones, but the effect on colorectal cancer risk is unclear. Removal of the ovaries alters levels of sex hormones in both pre- and postmenopausal women. In premenopausal women, bilateral oophorectomy is followed by surgical menopause as the endogenous estrogen levels drop. Both before and after natural menopause, bilateral oophorectomy promptly decreases endogenous androgen levels by half as the ovaries and adrenals are equally important for androgen production.
MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings?
Dr. Segelman: The present nationwide cohort study explored the association between removal of the ovaries for benign indications and subsequent risk of colorectal cancer. Among 195 973 women who underwent the procedure from 1965 – 2011, there was a 30% increased risk of colorectal cancer compared with the general population. After adjustment for various factors, women who underwent bilateral oophorectomy had a higher risk of rectal cancer than those who had unilateral oophorectomy (HR 2.28, 95% CI 1.33-3.91).
Dr. Alison Fecher[/caption]
Alison M. Fecher, MD
Assistant Professor of Surgery
Indiana University Health
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Dr. Fecher: It has long been known that female faculty are underrepresented in departments of surgery at U.S. medical schools. Our study wanted to identify obstacles women face in entering certain surgical subspecialties and in career advancement. We found that women are poorly represented in some of the most competitive subspecialties, including cardiothoracic and transplant surgery. We also found that women tend to advance more slowly up the career ladder, with many of them spending more years at the assistant professor level than their male counterparts. One reason for this may be that they tend to publish less peer-reviewed articles than male faculty; however, our results show that the publications of female faculty often has a greater impact on the field, as measured by citations and recentness of articles.




