scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "Per Anton Sirnes published in 2010"


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 2010-Europace
TL;DR: Guidelines summarize and evaluate all currently available evidence on a particular issue with the aim of assisting physicians in selecting the best management strategy for an individual patient suffering from a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome, as well as the risk–benefit ratio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means.
Abstract: Guidelines summarize and evaluate all currently available evidence on a particular issue with the aim of assisting physicians in selecting the best management strategy for an individual patient suffering from a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome, as well as the risk–benefit ratio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are no substitutes for textbooks. The legal implications of medical guidelines have been discussed previously. A large number of Guidelines have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) as well as by other societies and organizations. Because of the impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for development of guidelines have been established in order to make all decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC Web Site (http://www.escardio.org/knowledge/guidelines/rules). In brief, experts in the field are selected and undertake a comprehensive review of the published evidence for management and/or prevention of a given condition. A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is performed, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio. Estimates of expected health outcomes for larger societies are included, where data exist. The level of evidence and the strength of recommendation of particular treatment options are weighed and graded according to pre-defined scales, as outlined in Tables 1 and 2 . View this table: Table 1 Classes of recommendations View this table: Table 2 Levels of evidence The experts of the writing panels have provided disclosure statements of all relationships they may have that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. Any changes in conflict of interest that arise during the writing period must be notified to the ESC. The Task Force report received its entire financial support from …

3,749 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Experts in the field are selected and undertake a comprehensive review of the published evidence for management and/or prevention of a given condition, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio.
Abstract: Guidelines summarize and evaluate all currently available evidence on a particular issue with the aim of assisting physicians in selecting the best management strategies for an individual patient, suffering from a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome, as well as the risk–benefit ratio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are no substitutes for textbooks, and their legal implications have been discussed previously. Guidelines and recommendations should help physicians to make decisions in their daily practice. However, the ultimate judgement regarding the care of an individual patient must be made by his/her responsible physician(s). A large number of Guidelines have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) as well as by other societies and organizations. Because of the impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for the development of guidelines have been established in order to make all decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC Web Site (http://www.escardio.org/guidelines/rules). Members of this Task Force were selected by the ESC to represent all physicians involved with the medical care of patients in this pathology. In brief, experts in the field are selected and undertake a comprehensive review of the published evidence for management and/or prevention of a given condition. A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is performed, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio. Estimates of expected health outcomes for larger populations are included, where data exist. The level of evidence and the strength of recommendation of particular treatment options are weighed and graded according to pre-defined scales, as outlined in Tables 1 and 2 . View this table: Table 1 Classes of recommendations View this table: Table 2 Levels of evidence The experts of the writing and reviewing panels have provided disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which …

2,046 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The current joint position is that the initiation of beta blockers in patients who will undergo non-cardiac surgery should not be considered routine, but should be considered carefully by each patient's treating physician on a case-by-case basis.
Abstract: Guidelines for pre-operative cardiac risk assessment and perioperative cardiac management in non-cardiac surgery.

693 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 2010-Europace
TL;DR: In this paper, a focused update on the use of devices in heart failure is presented, which is the first publication of its kind from the Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG).
Abstract: AF : atrial fibrillation AV : atrio-ventricular CPG : Committee for Practice Guidelines CRT : cardiac resynchronization therapy CRT-P : CRT with pacemaker function CRT-D : CRT with defibrillator function CTX : cardiac transplantation CV : cardiovascular EHRA : European Heart Rhythm Association ESC : European Society of Cardiology HF : heart failure HFA : Heart Failure Association Hosp : hospitalization ICD : implantable cardioverter defibrillator LBBB : left bundle branch block LV : left ventricular LVAD : left ventricular assist device LVEDD : left ventricular end-diastolic diameter LVEF : left ventricular ejection fraction LVESi : left ventricular stroke volume index LVESV : left ventricular end-systolic volume 6MWT : 6 min walk test NA : not applicable NIH : National Institutes of Health NS : not significant NYHA : New York Heart Association OMT : optimal medical therapy pVO2 : peak oxygen consumption QoL : quality of life RBBB : right bundle branch block RCT : randomized clinical trial SR : sinus rhythm VE/CO2 : ventilation/carbon dioxide ratio The Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) of the European Society of Cardiology recognizes that new evidence from clinical research trials may impact on current recommendations. The current heart failure (HF) guidelines1 were published in 2008 and the cardiac pacing guidelines in 2007.2 In order to keep these guidelines up to date, it would be appropriate to modify the recommendations and levels of evidence according to the most recent clinical trial evidence. This Focused Update on the use of devices in heart failure 2010 is the first publication of its kind from the CPG. Practice Guideline recommendations should represent evidence-based medicine. Traditionally, these recommendations are based on the outcomes in the cohort of patients described by the inclusion criteria in the protocols of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). More recently, based on the fact that the characteristics of the patients actually included in a trial may differ substantially from the eligibility criteria, Guideline Task Force members frequently favour restricting the applicability of these recommendations to the clinical profile and outcomes of the enrolled cohort, representing a more accurate interpretation of the evidence provided by a trial's result. In contrast to previous guidelines, this focused update considers the characteristics of the patients included in the trials and contains several examples. In MADIT-CRT, although the protocol permitted inclusion of patients in both New York Heart Association (NYHA) I and II function class, only 15% of the patients included in this trial were classified as NYHA I, many of whom had been previously symptomatic. Similarly, although the inclusion criteria permitted randomization of patients with a QRS width of ≥130 m, the favourable effect on the primary endpoint was limited to patients with a QRS width of ≥150 ms, a prospective, pre-specified cut-off. The text accompanying these recommendations explains and justifies the decisions to …

578 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG), Alec Vahanian (Chairperson) (France), Angelo Auricchio (Switzerland), Jeroen Bax (The Netherlands), Claudio Ceconi (Italy), Veronica Dean (France) and Gerasimos Filippatos (Greece).
Abstract: ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG), Alec Vahanian (Chairperson) (France), Angelo Auricchio (Switzerland), Jeroen Bax (The Netherlands), Claudio Ceconi (Italy), Veronica Dean (France), Gerasimos Filippatos (Greece), Christian Funck-Brentano (France), Richard Hobbs (UK), Peter Kearney (Ireland), Theresa McDonagh (UK), Bogdan A.Popescu (Romania), ZeljkoReiner (Croatia), UdoSechtem (Germany), Per AntonSirnes (Norway), Michal Tendera (Poland), Panos Vardas (Greece), Petr Widimsky (Czech Republic)

192 citations