Author
Giuseppe Andò
Other affiliations: University of Rome Tor Vergata, University of Catania
Bio: Giuseppe Andò is an academic researcher from University of Messina. The author has contributed to research in topics: Percutaneous coronary intervention & Acute coronary syndrome. The author has an hindex of 24, co-authored 136 publications receiving 2882 citations. Previous affiliations of Giuseppe Andò include University of Rome Tor Vergata & University of Catania.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality.
1,018 citations
••
TL;DR: In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin.
Abstract: BACKGROUND Conflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome METHODS We randomly assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event) The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events RESULTS The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (103% and 109%, respectively; relative risk, 094; 95% confidence interval [CI], 081 to 109; P = 044), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (112% and 124%, respectively; relative risk, 089; 95% CI, 078 to 103; P = 012) Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (110% and 119%, respectively; relative risk, 091; 95% CI, 074 to 111; P = 034) CONCLUSIONS In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrialsgov number, NCT01433627) abstr act
322 citations
••
TL;DR: The prespecified final 1-year outcomes of the MATRIX programme, designed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of radial versus femoral access and of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin with optional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with the whole spectrum of acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, are described.
211 citations
••
TL;DR: In ACS patients who underwent invasive management, RA was associated with a reduced risk of AKI compared with FA, and Stratified analyses suggested greater benefit with RA than FA in patients at greater risk for AKI.
134 citations
••
TL;DR: Radial access reduces mortality compared with femoral access in ACS patients undergoing invasive management, supporting radial access as the default strategy for cardiac catheterization in patients with ACS.
Abstract: Objectives The authors sought to investigate whether the cumulative evidence coming from randomized studies has reached the necessary power to consider radial access as a bleeding avoidance strategy that reduces mortality and ischemic endpoints in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Background Studies in ACS patients have reached conflicting conclusions about the impact of radial access in improving ischemic outcomes in addition to the established bleeding benefit. Methods English-language publications and abstracts of major cardiovascular meetings until October 2015 were scrutinized. Study quality, patient characteristics, procedural data, and outcomes were extracted. Data were pooled in random effects meta-analyses with classic and trial sequential techniques. Trial sequential analysis combines the a priori information size calculation needed to allow for clinically meaningful statistical inference with the adjustment of thresholds for which results are considered significant. Results Seventeen studies, encompassing data from 19,328 patients, were pooled. Radial access was found to reduce mortality (relative risk [RR]: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60 to 0.88; p = 0.001), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77 to 0.95; p = 0.005), and major bleeding (RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.76; p Conclusions Radial access reduces mortality compared with femoral access in ACS patients undergoing invasive management. This benefit is paralleled by consistent reductions in major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding, supporting radial access as the default strategy for cardiac catheterization in patients with ACS.
90 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
TL;DR: 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation are published.
Abstract: 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)
6,599 citations
01 Mar 2007
TL;DR: An initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI is described.
Abstract: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.
5,467 citations
••
TL;DR: Authors/Task Force Members: Franz-Josef Neumann* (ESC Chairperson) (Germany), Miguel Sousa-Uva* (EACTS Chair person) (Portugal), Anders Ahlsson (Sweden), Fernando Alfonso (Spain), Adrian P. Banning (UK), Umberto Benedetto (UK).
4,342 citations
••
Leipzig University1, University of Belgrade2, Leiden University3, Uppsala University4, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia5, University of Barcelona6, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy7, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens8, François Rabelais University9, Royal Melbourne Hospital10, University of Melbourne11, University of Lisbon12, University of Birmingham13, University Medical Center Groningen14, University of Groningen15, University of Central Lancashire16
TL;DR: The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only and no commercial use is authorized.
Abstract: Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'eGFR category', '95 mL/min' (page 15). The cell should be coloured green instead of yellow. It should also read "60 mg"instead of "60 mg (use with caution in 'supranormal' renal function)."In the above-indicated cell, a footnote has also been added to state: "Edoxaban should be used in patients with high creatinine clearance only after a careful evaluation of the individual thromboembolic and bleeding risk."Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'Dose reduction in selected patients' (page 16). The cell should read "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily if any of the following: creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant use of dronedarone, erythromycin, ciclosporine or ketokonazole"instead of "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily, and edoxaban 30 mg reduced to 15mg once daily, if any of the following: creatinine clearance of 30-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant us of verapamil or quinidine or dronedarone."
4,285 citations
••
TL;DR: Neumann et al. as discussed by the authors proposed a task force to evaluate the EACTS Review Co-ordinator's work on gender equality in the context of women's reproductive health.
Abstract: Authors/Task Force Members: Franz-Josef Neumann* (ESC Chairperson) (Germany), Miguel Sousa-Uva* (EACTS Chairperson) (Portugal), Anders Ahlsson (Sweden), Fernando Alfonso (Spain), Adrian P. Banning (UK), Umberto Benedetto (UK), Robert A. Byrne (Germany), Jean-Philippe Collet (France), Volkmar Falk (Germany), Stuart J. Head (The Netherlands), Peter Jüni (Canada), Adnan Kastrati (Germany), Akos Koller (Hungary), Steen D. Kristensen (Denmark), Josef Niebauer (Austria), Dimitrios J. Richter (Greece), Petar M. Seferovi c (Serbia), Dirk Sibbing (Germany), Giulio G. Stefanini (Italy), Stephan Windecker (Switzerland), Rashmi Yadav (UK), Michael O. Zembala (Poland) Document Reviewers: William Wijns (ESC Review Co-ordinator) (Ireland), David Glineur (EACTS Review Co-ordinator) (Canada), Victor Aboyans (France), Stephan Achenbach (Germany), Stefan Agewall (Norway), Felicita Andreotti (Italy), Emanuele Barbato (Italy), Andreas Baumbach (UK), James Brophy (Canada), Héctor Bueno (Spain), Patrick A. Calvert (UK), Davide Capodanno (Italy), Piroze M. Davierwala
3,879 citations