Rush University Medical Center

About: Rush University Medical Center is a healthcare organization based out in Chicago, Illinois, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Medicine. The organization has 13915 authors who have published 29027 publications receiving 1379216 citations. The organization is also known as: Rush Presbyterian St. Luke's Medical Center.

Critical Care Management of Patients Following Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Recommendations from the Neurocritical Care Society’s Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference

Abstract: Subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is an acute cerebrovascular event which can have devastating effects on the central nervous system as well as a profound impact on several other organs SAH patients are routinely admitted to an intensive care unit and are cared for by a multidisciplinary team A lack of high quality data has led to numerous approaches to management and limited guidance on choosing among them Existing guidelines emphasize risk factors, prevention, natural history, and prevention of rebleeding, but provide limited discussion of the complex critical care issues involved in the care of SAH patients The Neurocritical Care Society organized an international, multidisciplinary consensus conference on the critical care management of SAH to address this need Experts from neurocritical care, neurosurgery, neurology, interventional neuroradiology, and neuroanesthesiology from Europe and North America were recruited based on their publications and expertise A jury of four experienced neurointensivists was selected for their experience in clinical investigations and development of practice guidelines Recommendations were developed based on literature review using the GRADE system, discussion integrating the literature with the collective experience of the participants and critical review by an impartial jury Recommendations were developed using the GRADE system Emphasis was placed on the principle that recommendations should be based not only on the quality of the data but also tradeoffs and translation into practice Strong consideration was given to providing guidance and recommendations for all issues faced in the daily management of SAH patients, even in the absence of high quality data

Feasibility of Treating Prehypertension with an Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker

Abstract: Background Prehypertension is considered a precursor of stage 1 hypertension and a predictor of excessive cardiovascular risk. We investigated whether pharmacologic treatment of prehypertension prevents or postpones stage 1 hypertension. Methods Participants with repeated measurements of systolic pressure of 130 to 139 mm Hg and diastolic pressure of 89 mm Hg or lower, or systolic pressure of 139 mm Hg or lower and diastolic pressure of 85 to 89 mm Hg, were randomly assigned to receive two years of candesartan (Atacand, AstraZeneca) or placebo, followed by two years of placebo for all. When a participant reached the study end point of stage 1 hypertension, treatment with antihypertensive agents was initiated. Both the candesartan group and the placebo group were instructed to make changes in lifestyle to reduce blood pressure throughout the trial. Results A total of 409 participants were randomly assigned to candesartan, and 400 to placebo. Data on 772 participants (391 in the candesartan group and 381 in the placebo group; mean age, 48.5 years; 59.6 percent men) were available for analysis. During the first two years, hypertension developed in 154 participants in the placebo group and 53 of those in the candesartan group (relative risk reduction, 66.3 percent; P<0.001). After four years, hypertension had developed in 240 participants in the placebo group and 208 of those in the candesartan group (relative risk reduction, 15.6 percent; P<0.007). Serious adverse events occurred in 3.5 percent of the participants assigned to candesartan and 5.9 percent of those receiving placebo. Conclusions Over a period of four years, stage 1 hypertension developed in nearly two thirds of patients with untreated prehypertension (the placebo group). Treatment of prehypertension with candesartan appeared to be well tolerated and reduced the risk of incident hypertension during the study period. Thus, treatment of prehypertension appears to be feasible. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00227318.)

Perioperative Bridging Anticoagulation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract: BACKGROUND It is uncertain whether bridging anticoagulation is necessary for patients with atrial fibrillation who need an interruption in warfarin treatment for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure. We hypothesized that forgoing bridging anticoagulation would be noninferior to bridging with low-molecularweight heparin for the prevention of perioperative arterial thromboembolism and would be superior to bridging with respect to major bleeding. METHODS We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which, after perioperative interruption of warfarin therapy, patients were randomly assigned to receive bridging anticoagulation therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (100 IU of dalteparin per kilogram of body weight) or matching placebo administered subcutaneously twice daily, from 3 days before the procedure until 24 hours before the procedure and then for 5 to 10 days after the procedure. Warfarin treatment was stopped 5 days before the procedure and was resumed within 24 hours after the procedure. Follow-up of patients continued for 30 days after the procedure. The primary outcomes were arterial thromboembolism (stroke, systemic embolism, or transient ischemic attack) and major bleeding. RESULTS In total, 1884 patients were enrolled, with 950 assigned to receive no bridging therapy and 934 assigned to receive bridging therapy. The incidence of arterial thromboembolism was 0.4% in the no-bridging group and 0.3% in the bridging group (risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.6 to 0.8; P = 0.01 for noninferiority). The incidence of major bleeding was 1.3% in the no-bridging group and 3.2% in the bridging group (relative risk, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.78; P = 0.005 for superiority). CONCLUSIONS In patients with atrial fibrillation who had warfarin treatment interrupted for an elective operation or other elective invasive procedure, forgoing bridging anticoagulation was noninferior to perioperative bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin for the prevention of arterial thromboembolism and decreased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health; BRIDGE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00786474.)