MyMedR

Displaying all 6 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Rationale, Design, and Baseline Characteristics of the EPICOR Asia Study (Long-tErm follow-uP of antithrombotic management patterns In Acute CORonary Syndrome patients in Asia)

Huo Y, Lee SW, Sawhney JP, Kim HS, Krittayaphong R, Nhan VT, et al.

Clin Cardiol, 2015 Sep;38(9):511-9.
PMID: 26206158 DOI: 10.1002/clc.22431

BACKGROUND: In-hospital and postdischarge mortality for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) vary across Asia and remain generally poorer than globally. The relationship between real-life antithrombotic management patterns (AMPs) and ACS-related outcomes in Asia is unclear.
METHODS: EPICOR Asia (Long-tErm follow-uP of antithrombotic management patterns In acute CORonary syndrome patients in Asia) (NCT01361386) is a prospective, multinational, observational study of patients discharged after hospitalization for an ACS, with 2-year follow-up. The aim is to describe short- and long-term (up to 2 years post-index event) AMPs in patients hospitalized for ACS and to record clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use, and self-reported health status. Pre- and in-hospital management, AMPs, and associated outcomes, with particular focus on ischemic and bleeding events, will be recorded during the 2-year follow up.
RESULTS: Between June 2011 and May 2012, 13 005 patients were enrolled. From these, 12 922 patients surviving an ACS (6616 with STEMI, 2570 with NSTEMI, and 3736 with UA) were eligible for inclusion from 219 hospitals across 8 countries and regions in Asia: China (n = 8214), Hong Kong (n = 177), India (n = 2468), Malaysia (n = 100), Singapore (n = 93), South Korea (n = 705), Thailand (n = 957), and Vietnam (n = 208).
CONCLUSIONS: EPICOR Asia will provide information regarding clinical management and AMPs for ACS patients in Asia. Impact of AMPs on clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use, and self-reported health status both during hospitalization and up to 2 years after discharge will also be described.
Ethnic differences in utilization of invasive cardiac procedures and in long-term survival following acute myocardial infarction

Mak KH, Kark JD, Chia KS, Tan C, Foong BH, Chew SK

Clin Cardiol, 2004 May;27(5):275-80.
PMID: 15188942

BACKGROUND: Ethnic differences in coronary mortality have been documented, and South Asians from the Indian subcontinent are particularly vulnerable.
HYPOTHESIS: This study sought to determine whether there was a difference in the utilization of invasive cardiac procedures and long-term mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction (MI) among Chinese, Malays, and South Asians in Singapore.
METHODS: All MI events in the country were identified and defined by the Singapore Myocardial Infarction Register, which uses modified procedures of the World Health Organization MONICA Project. Information on utilization of coronary angiography, coronary angioplasty, coronary artery bypass graft, and survival was obtained by data linkage with national billing and death registries. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model with adjustment for baseline characteristics.
RESULTS: From 1991 to 1999, there were 10,294 patients who survived > or = 3 days of MI. Of these, 40.6% underwent coronary angiography and 16.5% a revascularization procedure < or = 28 days. Malays received substantially less angiography (34.0%) and revascularization (11.4%) than Chinese (41.9%, 17.9%) and South Asians (40.0%, 16.3%). The ethnic disparity increased during the 1990s, particularly in the performance of coronary angiography (p = 0.038). While fatality declined during the study period for Chinese and South Asians, the rate remained stable for Malays. After a median follow-up period of 4.1 years, survival was lowest among Malays (adjusted HR, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.42, compared with Chinese).
CONCLUSION: Ethnic inequalities in invasive cardiac procedures exist in Singapore and were exacerbated in the 1990s. Inequalities in medical care may contribute to the poorer longterm survival among Malays.
Fulltext Use of ticagrelor alongside fibrinolytic therapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Practical perspectives based on data from the TREAT study

Berwanger O, Abdelhamid M, Alexander T, Alzubaidi A, Averkov O, Aylward P, et al.

Clin Cardiol, 2018 Oct;41(10):1322-1327.
PMID: 30098028 DOI: 10.1002/clc.23043

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion method in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In patients with STEMI who cannot undergo timely primary PCI, pharmacoinvasive treatment is recommended, comprising immediate fibrinolytic therapy with subsequent coronary angiography and rescue PCI if needed. Improving clinical outcomes following fibrinolysis remains of great importance for the many patients globally for whom rapid treatment with primary PCI is not possible. For patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent primary PCI, the PLATO trial demonstrated superior efficacy of ticagrelor relative to clopidogrel. Results in the predefined subgroup of patients with STEMI were consistent with the overall PLATO trial. Patients who received fibrinolytic therapy in the 24 hours before randomization were excluded from PLATO, and there is thus a lack of data on the safety of using ticagrelor in conjunction with fibrinolytic therapy in the first 24 hours after STEMI. The TREAT study addresses this knowledge gap; patients with STEMI who had symptom onset within the previous 24 hours and had received fibrinolytic therapy (of whom 89.4% had also received clopidogrel) were randomized to treatment with ticagrelor or clopidogrel (median time between fibrinolysis and randomization: 11.5 hours). At 30 days, ticagrelor was found to be non-inferior to clopidogrel for the primary safety outcome of Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI)-defined first major bleeding. Considering together the results of the PLATO and TREAT studies, initiating or switching to treatment with ticagrelor within the first 24 hours after STEMI in patients receiving fibrinolysis is reasonable.
Fulltext Long-term antithrombotic management patterns in Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome: 2-year observations from the EPICOR Asia study

Zheng B, Huo Y, Lee SW, Sawhney JPS, Kim HS, Krittayaphong R, et al.

Clin Cardiol, 2020 Sep;43(9):999-1008.
PMID: 32618009 DOI: 10.1002/clc.23400

BACKGROUND: Despite guideline recommendations, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is frequently used for longer than 1 year after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event. In Asia, information on antithrombotic management patterns (AMPs), including DAPT post discharge, is sparse. This analysis evaluated real-world AMPs up to 2 years post discharge for ACS.
HYPOTHESIS: There is wide variability in AMP use for ACS management in Asia.
METHODS: EPICOR Asia (NCT01361386) is a prospective observational study of patients discharged after hospitalization for an ACS in eight countries/regions in Asia, followed up for 2 years. Here, we describe AMPs used and present an exploratory analysis of characteristics and outcomes in patients who received DAPT for ≤12 months post discharge compared with >12 months.
RESULTS: Data were available for 12 922 patients; of 11 639 patients discharged on DAPT, 2364 (20.3%) received DAPT for ≤12 months and 9275 (79.7%) for >12 months, with approximately 60% still on DAPT at 2 years. Patients who received DAPT for >12 months were more likely to be younger, obese, lower Killip class, resident in India (vs China), and to have received invasive reperfusion. Clinical event rates during year 2 of follow-up were lower in patients with DAPT >12 vs ≤12 months, but no causal association can be implied in this non-randomized study.
CONCLUSIONS: Most ACS patients remained on DAPT up to 1 year, in accordance with current guidelines, and over half remained on DAPT at 2 years post discharge. Patients not on DAPT at 12 months are a higher risk group requiring careful monitoring.
Fulltext Invasive and antiplatelet treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Understanding and addressing the global risk-treatment paradox

Ahrens I, Averkov O, Zúñiga EC, Fong AYY, Alhabib KF, Halvorsen S, et al.

Clin Cardiol, 2019 Oct;42(10):1028-1040.
PMID: 31317575 DOI: 10.1002/clc.23232

Clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) recommend an invasive strategy with cardiac catheterization, revascularization when clinically appropriate, and initiation of dual antiplatelet therapy regardless of whether the patient receives revascularization. However, although patients with NSTEMI have a higher long-term mortality risk than patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), they are often treated less aggressively; with those who have the highest ischemic risk often receiving the least aggressive treatment (the "treatment-risk paradox"). Here, using evidence gathered from across the world, we examine some reasons behind the suboptimal treatment of patients with NSTEMI, and recommend approaches to address this issue in order to improve the standard of healthcare for this group of patients. The challenges for the treatment of patients with NSTEMI can be categorized into four "P" factors that contribute to poor clinical outcomes: patient characteristics being heterogeneous; physicians underestimating the high ischemic risk compared with bleeding risk; procedure availability; and policy within the healthcare system. To address these challenges, potential approaches include: developing guidelines and protocols that incorporate rigorous definitions of NSTEMI; risk assessment and integrated quality assessment measures; providing education to physicians on the management of long-term cardiovascular risk in patients with NSTEMI; and making stents and antiplatelet therapies more accessible to patients.
Fulltext Secular trends of health care resource utilization and costs between Brugada syndrome and congenital long QT syndrome: A territory-wide study

Lee S, Chung CTS, Radford D, Chou OHI, Lee TTL, Ng ZMW, et al.

Clin Cardiol, 2023 Oct;46(10):1194-1201.
PMID: 37489866 DOI: 10.1002/clc.24102

BACKGROUND: Health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs are important metrics of health care burden, but they have rarely been explored in the setting of cardiac ion channelopathies.
HYPOTHESIS: This study tested the hypothesis that attendance-related HCRUs and costs differed between patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS) and congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS).
METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive BrS and LQTS patients at public hospitals or clinics in Hong Kong, China. HCRUs and costs (in USD) for Accident and Emergency (A&E), inpatient, general outpatient and specialist outpatient attendances were analyzed between 2001 and 2019 at the cohort level. Comparisons were made using incidence rate ratios (IRRs [95% confidence intervals]).
RESULTS: Over the 19-year period, 516 BrS (median age of initial presentation: 51 [interquartile range: 38-61] years, 92% male) and 134 LQTS (median age of initial presentation: 21 [9-44] years, 32% male) patients were included. Compared to LQTS patients, BrS patients had lower total costs (2 008 126 [2 007 622-2 008 629] vs. 2 343 864 [2 342 828-2 344 900]; IRR: 0.857 [0.855-0.858]), higher costs for A&E attendances (83 113 [83 048-83 177] vs. 70 604 [70 487-70 721]; IRR: 1.177 [1.165-1.189]) and general outpatient services (2,176 [2,166-2,187] vs. 921 [908-935]; IRR: 2.363 [2.187-2.552]), but lower costs for inpatient stay (1 391 624 [1 391 359-1 391 889] vs. 1 713 742 [1 713 166-1 714 319]; IRR: 0.812 [0.810-0.814]) and lower costs for specialist outpatient services (531 213 [531 049-531 376] vs. 558 597 [558268-558926]; IRR: 0.951 [0.947-0.9550]).
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, BrS patients consume 14% less health care resources compared to LQTS patients in terms of attendance costs. BrS patients require more A&E and general outpatient services, but less inpatient and specialist outpatient services than LQTS patients.