Bruce R. Brodie

Bio: Bruce R. Brodie is an academic researcher from Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Myocardial infarction & Percutaneous coronary intervention. The author has an hindex of 65, co-authored 207 publications receiving 21240 citations. Previous affiliations of Bruce R. Brodie include Jagiellonian University & Beaumont Hospital.

Effect of Intensive Compared With Moderate Lipid-Lowering Therapy on Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis A Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract: ContextStatin drugs reduce both atherogenic lipoproteins and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, the optimal strategy and target level for lipid reduction remain uncertain.ObjectiveTo compare the effect of regimens designed to produce intensive lipid lowering or moderate lipid lowering on coronary artery atheroma burden and progression.Design, Setting, and PatientsDouble-blind, randomized active control multicenter trial (Reversal of Atherosclerosis with Aggressive Lipid Lowering [REVERSAL]) performed at 34 community and tertiary care centers in the United States comparing the effects of 2 different statins administered for 18 months. Intravascular ultrasound was used to measure progression of atherosclerosis. Between June 1999 and September 2001, 654 patients were randomized and received study drug; 502 had evaluable intravascular ultrasound examinations at baseline and after 18 months of treatment.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to receive a moderate lipid-lowering regimen consisting of 40 mg of pravastatin or an intensive lipid-lowering regimen consisting of 80 mg of atorvastatin.Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary efficacy parameter was the percentage change in atheroma volume (follow-up minus baseline).ResultsBaseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (mean, 150.2 mg/dL [3.89 mmol/L] in both treatment groups) was reduced to 110 mg/dL (2.85 mmol/L) in the pravastatin group and to 79 mg/dL (2.05 mmol/L) in the atorvastatin group (P<.001). C-reactive protein decreased 5.2% with pravastatin and 36.4% with atorvastatin (P<.001). The primary end point (percentage change in atheroma volume) showed a significantly lower progression rate in the atorvastatin (intensive) group (P = .02). Similar differences between groups were observed for secondary efficacy parameters, including change in total atheroma volume (P = .02), change in percentage atheroma volume (P<.001), and change in atheroma volume in the most severely diseased 10-mm vessel subsegment (P<.01). For the primary end point, progression of coronary atherosclerosis occurred in the pravastatin group (2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2% to 4.7%; P = .001) compared with baseline. Progression did not occur in the atorvastatin group (−0.4%; CI −2.4% to 1.5%; P = .98) compared with baseline.ConclusionsFor patients with coronary heart disease, intensive lipid-lowering treatment with atorvastatin reduced progression of coronary atherosclerosis compared with pravastatin. Compared with baseline values, patients treated with atorvastatin had no change in atheroma burden, whereas patients treated with pravastatin showed progression of coronary atherosclerosis. These differences may be related to the greater reduction in atherogenic lipoproteins and C- reactive protein in patients treated with atorvastatin.

Bivalirudin during Primary PCI in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Abstract: A b s t r ac t Background Treatment with the direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, results in similar suppression of ischemia while reducing hemorrhagic complications in patients with stable angina and non−STsegment elevation acute coronary syndromes who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The safety and efficacy of bivalirudin in high-risk patients are unknown. Methods We randomly assigned 3602 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who presented within 12 hours after the onset of symptoms and who were undergoing primary PCI to treatment with heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor or to treatment with bivalirudin alone. The two primary end points of the study were major bleeding and combined adverse clinical events, defined as the combination of major bleeding or major adverse cardiovascular events, including death, reinfarction, target-vessel revascularization for ischemia, and stroke (hereinafter referred to as net adverse clinical events) within 30 days. Results Anticoagulation with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, resulted in a reduced 30-day rate of net adverse clinical events (9.2% vs. 12.1%; relative risk, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.92; P = 0.005), owing to a lower rate of major bleeding (4.9% vs. 8.3%; relative risk, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.77; P<0.001). There was an increased risk of acute stent thrombosis within 24 hours in the bivalirudin group, but no significant increase was present by 30 days. Treatment with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, resulted in significantly lower 30-day rates of death from cardiac causes (1.8% vs. 2.9%; relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P = 0.03) and death from all causes (2.1% vs. 3.1%; relative risk, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.00; P = 0.047). Conclusions In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who are undergoing primary PCI, anticoagulation with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, results in significantly reduced 30-day rates of major bleeding and net adverse clinical events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00433966.)

Coronary Angioplasty with or without Stent Implantation for Acute Myocardial Infarction

Abstract: Background Coronary-stent implantation is frequently performed for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. However, few studies have compared stent implantation with primary angioplasty alone. Methods We designed a multicenter study to compare primary angioplasty with angioplasty accompanied by implantation of a heparin-coated Palmaz–Schatz stent. Patients with acute myocardial infarction underwent emergency catheterization and angioplasty. Those with vessels suitable for stenting were randomly assigned to undergo angioplasty with stenting (452 patients) or angioplasty alone (448 patients). Results The mean (±SD) minimal luminal diameter was larger after stenting than after angioplasty alone (2.56±0.44 mm vs. 2.12±0.45 mm, P<0.001), although fewer patients assigned to stenting had grade 3 blood flow (according to the classification of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trial) (89.4 percent, vs. 92.7 percent in the angioplasty group; P=0.10). After six months, fewer patients in the stent group tha...

Lifetime Prevalence and Age-of-Onset Distributions of DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication

Abstract: Context Little is known about lifetime prevalence or age of onset of DSM-IV disorders. Objective To estimate lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the recently completed National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Design and Setting Nationally representative face-to-face household survey conducted between February 2001 and April 2003 using the fully structured World Health Organization World Mental Health Survey version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Participants Nine thousand two hundred eighty-two English-speaking respondents aged 18 years and older. Main Outcome Measures Lifetime DSM-IV anxiety, mood, impulse-control, and substance use disorders. Results Lifetime prevalence estimates are as follows: anxiety disorders, 28.8%; mood disorders, 20.8%; impulse-control disorders, 24.8%; substance use disorders, 14.6%; any disorder, 46.4%. Median age of onset is much earlier for anxiety (11 years) and impulse-control (11 years) disorders than for substance use (20 years) and mood (30 years) disorders. Half of all lifetime cases start by age 14 years and three fourths by age 24 years. Later onsets are mostly of comorbid conditions, with estimated lifetime risk of any disorder at age 75 years (50.8%) only slightly higher than observed lifetime prevalence (46.4%). Lifetime prevalence estimates are higher in recent cohorts than in earlier cohorts and have fairly stable intercohort differences across the life course that vary in substantively plausible ways among sociodemographic subgroups. Conclusions About half of Americans will meet the criteria for a DSM-IV disorder sometime in their life, with first onset usually in childhood or adolescence. Interventions aimed at prevention or early treatment need to focus on youth.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction—Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction)

Abstract: Although considerable improvement has occurred in the process of care for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), room for improvement exists.[1–3][1][][2][][3] The purpose of the present guideline is to focus on the numerous advances in the diagnosis and management of patients

ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Presenting With ST-Segment Elevation

Abstract: ACE : angiotensin-converting enzyme ACS : acute coronary syndrome ADP : adenosine diphosphate AF : atrial fibrillation AMI : acute myocardial infarction AV : atrioventricular AIDA-4 : Abciximab Intracoronary vs. intravenously Drug Application APACHE II : Acute Physiology Aand Chronic