Elliott M. Antman

Bio: Elliott M. Antman is an academic researcher from Brigham and Women's Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Myocardial infarction & TIMI. The author has an hindex of 161, co-authored 716 publications receiving 179462 citations. Previous affiliations of Elliott M. Antman include Duke University & Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

Patterns of long-term thienopyridine therapy and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with coronary stenting: Observations from the TIMI-38 Coronary Stent Registry.

Abstract: Background The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is not known. Factors influencing DAPT duration are not well described. Hypothesis We hypothesized that continued DAPT 12 months beyond ACS would be associated with patient factors such as stent type and that it may be associated with lower rates of ischemic events. Methods The TIMI 38 Coronary Stent Registry (CSR) followed patients who completed the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial, received a stent, and were alive and event free. Continuation of DAPT was determined by the treating physician. Results The CSR enrolled 2110 patients (1679>12 months from index ACS) and followed for a median of 2.1 additional years. DAPT was continued in 554 (26%) and was more likely to be continued in patients with drug-eluting stents (DES; 54%) and in North America. The rate of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke was 2.35% per year, and 13 patients (0.6%) experienced Academic Research Consortium definite or probable ST. Recurrent ischemic events were similar between patients who continued thienopyridine therapy and those who stopped at registry entry (P = 0.74 for cardiovascular death/MI/stroke; P = 0.72 for definite or probable ST). After propensity score adjustment, there was no significant difference in cardiovascular death/MI/stroke (P = 0.55) or bleeding (P = 0.51) with prolonged DAPT. Conclusions Patients stabilized for a year after ACS and stenting have low rates of ST relative to overall cardiovascular events. The decision to continue DAPT maybe associated with stent type (DES vs bare-metal stent) and region.

Edoxaban and implantable cardiac device interventions: insights from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial.

Abstract: Aims Pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantations and generator changes are frequently performed in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. In an exploratory analysis, we investigated the outcome of patients undergoing such device procedures in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial. Methods and results During the trial, 1217 device procedures were performed in 1145 patients, with intervention dates available for 1203 procedures. Two hundred and twenty-five procedures (in 212 patients) were performed >30 days after study drug was stopped and are not included in the event analysis. For most interventions (n = 728, 74%), study drug was interrupted >3 days (median for the entire cohort: 5 days, interquartile range 0-11 days); 250 interventions were performed with ≤3 days study drug interruption. During the first 30 days after the procedure, six strokes/systemic embolic events (SEEs) (three each in the lower-dose edoxaban and warfarin arm) and one major bleeding event (in the lower-dose edoxaban arm) occurred; no stroke/SEEs or major bleeds occurred around the 295 device procedures in the higher-dose edoxaban arm. Two ischaemic and one major bleeding event occurred after the 288 device procedures performed with ≤3 days periprocedural interruption of study drug. Conclusion In this first experience of patients undergoing device surgery with edoxaban, a low risk of ischaemic and bleeding events was observed during the first 30 days post-procedure. Our data are in line with current recommendations of no or only brief interruption of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants prior to cardiac device surgery.

Impact of Injections During Diagnostic Coronary Arteriography on Coronary Patency in the Setting of Acute Myocardial Infarction from the TIMI Trials

Abstract: Although the primary end point of many angiographic thrombolytic patency trials is assessed at 90 minutes, injections are often performed before this standard time point. The Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Angiographic Core Laboratory uses the first injection at each time point (60, 75, and 90 minutes) after thrombolytic administration to assess the TIMI flow grade and the corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC). Whereas the coronary arteriogram is conventionally viewed as “diagnostic,” the frequency with which this first injection might be “therapeutic” and contribute to the mechanical opening of occluded coronary arteries is not well defined. We hypothesized that mechanical opening is infrequent, and we studied 4,021 consecutive first injections (815 that were occluded) in the TIMI 10B and 14 trials to define its frequency and to determine the potential impact that injections have on patency rates in thrombolytic trials.

Current concepts in the use of digitalis.

Abstract: After more than two centuries of administration of digitalis glycosides to patients with cardiac disease, empirical observation and tradition remain the basis for much of the clinical application of these drugs. Many questions remain, and the role of digitalis in the management of congestive heart failure and cardiac rhythm disturbances is changing with improvement in our understanding of the pathophysiology of these conditions and the availability of newer effective agents that may have less potential to cause life-threatening toxicity. Nevertheless, digitalis glycoside therapy is a familiar therapeutic intervention for the majority of physicians and remains appropriate in carefully selected patients. The development of digoxin-specific Fab fragments has led to improvement in treatment of advanced and refractory digitalis toxicity and opens up the possibility of improvement in diagnosis of less clinically obvious cases of digitalis intoxication. The role of digitalis glycosides in the management of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias and congestive heart failure in the presence of sinus rhythm should now be revised. In each of these clinical circumstances, alternative drugs or other modes of therapy have been developed that reduce the dependence of clinicians on digitalis as the sole or primary approach to management. In the immediate management of paroxysmal reentrant supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, verapamil has largely replaced digoxin as the drug of choice, although digoxin has an ancillary role, especially in patients with impaired ventricular function. In the management of patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter with a rapid ventricular response, verapamil or diltiazem and beta-adrenergic-blocking drugs will effectively slow the ventricular response, thus reducing the likelihood of approaching the threshold of digitalis toxicity to achieve adequate rate control. In the treatment of patients with congestive heart failure and normal sinus rhythm, one must now recognize a subset of patients with diastolic rather than systolic dysfunction who are best treated by correcting underlying causes of left ventricular hypertrophy or ischemia rather than inotropic support with cardiac glycosides. Symptomatic patients with dilated ventricles and impaired contractile function should undergo correction of abnormalities of preload with vasodilators acting on the venous bed as well as diuretics, and reduction of elevated afterload with vasodilators that reduce arteriolar resistance and thus improve ventricular emptying.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice? Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis. Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4 Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted? A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …

The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration

Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report.

Abstract: "The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure" provides a new guideline for hypertension prevention and management. The following are the key messages(1) In persons older than 50 years, systolic blood pressure (BP) of more than 140 mm Hg is a much more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; (2) The risk of CVD, beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, doubles with each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; individuals who are normotensive at 55 years of age have a 90% lifetime risk for developing hypertension; (3) Individuals with a systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg or a diastolic BP of 80 to 89 mm Hg should be considered as prehypertensive and require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent CVD; (4) Thiazide-type diuretics should be used in drug treatment for most patients with uncomplicated hypertension, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes. Certain high-risk conditions are compelling indications for the initial use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers); (5) Most patients with hypertension will require 2 or more antihypertensive medications to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease); (6) If BP is more than 20/10 mm Hg above goal BP, consideration should be given to initiating therapy with 2 agents, 1 of which usually should be a thiazide-type diuretic; and (7) The most effective therapy prescribed by the most careful clinician will control hypertension only if patients are motivated. Motivation improves when patients have positive experiences with and trust in the clinician. Empathy builds trust and is a potent motivator. Finally, in presenting these guidelines, the committee recognizes that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.