https://caltcm.memberclicks.net/assets/documents/acc_aha_chf_2013_guidelines.pdf

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

http://cardiologia.publicacionmedica.com/contenido/images/stemi_aha_2013.pdf

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Mariell Jessup, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair [*][1]

William T. Abraham, MD, FACC, FAHA[†][2]

Donald E. Casey, MD, MPH, MBA[‡][3]

Arthur M. Feldman, MD, PhD, FACC, FAHA[§][4]

Gary S. Francis, MD, FACC, FAHA[§][4]

Theodore G. Ganiats, MD[∥][5]

Marvin A. Konstam, MD, FACC[¶][6]

Donna M.

/pdf/2009-focused-update-incorporated-into-the-acc-aha-2005-3z9lhvyqwq.pdf

2009 Focused Update Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2005 Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure in Adults A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: Developed in Collaboration With the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation

The medical profession should play a central role in evaluating the evidence related to drugs, …

https://www.minapharm.com/_handler/DownloadHandler.ashx?n=238.pdf&f=Attach&fileName=05020.pdf

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

s in PubMed), and more liberal use of summary recommendation tables (with references that support LOE) to serve as a quick reference. In April 2011, the Institute of Medicine released 2 reports: Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews and Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust.2,3 It is noteworthy that the IOM cited ACCF/AHA practice guidelines as being compliant with many of the proposed standards. A thorough review of these reports and of our current methodology is under way, with further enhancements anticipated. The recommendations in this guideline are considered current until they are superseded by a focused update or the fulltext guideline is revised. The reader is encouraged to consult the full-text guideline for additional guidance and details about the care of the patient with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), because the Executive Summary contains only the recommendations. Guidelines are official policy of both the ACCF and AHA. Jeffrey L. Anderson, MD, FACC, FAHA Chair, ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines O’Gara et al 2013 ACCF/AHA STEMI Guideline Executive Summary 533

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary

A BSTRACT Background Patients with reduced left ventricular function after myocardial infarction are at risk for lifethreatening ventricular arrhythmias. This randomized trial was designed to evaluate the effect of an implantable defibrillator on survival in such patients. Methods Over the course of four years, we enrolled 1232 patients with a prior myocardial infarction and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.30 or less. Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2 ratio to receive an implantable defibrillator (742 patients) or conventional medical therapy (490 patients). Invasive electrophysiological testing for risk stratification was not required. Death from any cause was the end point. Results The clinical characteristics at base line and the prevalence of medication use at the time of the last follow-up visit were similar in the two treatment groups. During an average follow-up of 20 months, the mortality rates were 19.8 percent in the conventional-therapy group and 14.2 percent in the defibrillator group. The hazard ratio for the risk of death from any cause in the defibrillator group as compared with the conventional-therapy group was 0.69 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.93; P=0.016). The effect of defibrillator therapy on survival was similar in subgroup analyses stratified according to age, sex, ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, and the QRS interval. Conclusions In patients with a prior myocardial infarction and advanced left ventricular dysfunction, prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator improves survival and should be considered as a recommended therapy. (N Engl J Med 2002;346:877-83.)

Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction

Background Unsustained ventricular tachycardia in patients with previous myocardial infarction and left ventricular dysfunction is associated with a twoyear mortality rate of about 30 percent. We studied whether prophylactic therapy with an implanted cardioverter–defibrillator, as compared with conventional medical therapy, would improve survival in this high-risk group of patients. Methods Over the course of five years, 196 patients in New York Heart Association functional class I, II, or III with prior myocardial infarction; a left ventricular ejection fraction � 0.35; a documented episode of asymptomatic unsustained ventricular tachycardia; and inducible, nonsuppressible ventricular tachyarrhythmia on electrophysiologic study were randomly assigned to receive an implanted defibrillator (n � 95) or conventional medical therapy (n � 101). We used a two-sided sequential design with death from any cause as the end point. Results The base-line characteristics of the two treatment groups were similar. During an average follow-up of 27 months, there were 15 deaths in the defibrillator group (11 from cardiac causes) and 39 deaths in the conventional-therapy group (27 from cardiac causes) (hazard ratio for overall mortality, 0.46; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.82; P � 0.009). There was no evidence that amiodarone, beta-blockers, or any other antiarrhythmic therapy had a significant influence on the observed hazard ratio. Conclusions In patients with a prior myocardial infarction who are at high risk for ventricular tachyarrhythmia, prophylactic therapy with an implanted defibrillator leads to improved survival as compared with conventional medical therapy. (N Engl J Med

J Ames

Papers

Prophylactic implantation of a defibrillator in patients with myocardial infarction and reduced ejection fraction

Improved survival with an implanted defibrillator in patients with coronary disease at high risk for ventricular arrhythmia