ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Related collections

Most cited references 575

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Analysis of probability as an aid in the clinical diagnosis of coronary-artery disease.

G Diamond, J S Forrester (1979)

The diagnosis of coronary-artery disease has become increasingly complex. Many different results, obtained from tests with substantial imperfections, must be integrated into a diagnostic conclusion about the probability of disease in a given patient. To approach this problem in a practical manner, we reviewed the literature to estimate the pretest likelihood of disease (defined by age, sex and symptoms) and the sensitivity and specificity of four diagnostic tests: stress electrocardiography, cardiokymography, thallium scintigraphy and cardiac fluoroscopy. With this information, test results can be analyzed by use of Bayes' theorem of conditional probability. This approach has several advantages. It pools the diagnostic experience of many physicians ans integrates fundamental pretest clinical descriptors with many varying test results to summarize reproducibly and meaningfully the probability of angiographic coronary-artery disease. This approach also aids, but does not replace, the physician's judgment and may assit in decisions on cost effectiveness of tests.

0 comments Cited 292 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Bias in analytic research

David Sackett (1979)

0 comments Cited 182 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study. Final results.

R McBride (1991)

Atrial fibrillation in the absence of rheumatic valvular disease is associated with a fivefold to sevenfold increased risk of ischemic stroke. The Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study, a multicenter, randomized trial, compared 325 mg/day aspirin (double-blind) or warfarin with placebo for prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (primary events), and included 1,330 inpatients and outpatients with constant or intermittent atrial fibrillation. During a mean follow-up of 1.3 years, the rate of primary events in patients assigned to placebo was 6.3% per year and was reduced by 42% in those assigned to aspirin (3.6% per year; p = 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 9-63%). In the subgroup of warfarin-eligible patients (most less than 76 years old), warfarin dose-adjusted to prolong prothrombin time to 1.3-fold to 1.8-fold that of control reduced the risk of primary events by 67% (warfarin versus placebo, 2.3% versus 7.4% per year; p = 0.01; 95% confidence interval, 27-85%). Primary events or death were reduced 58% (p = 0.01) by warfarin and 32% (p = 0.02) by aspirin. The risk of significant bleeding was 1.5%, 1.4%, and 1.6% per year in patients assigned to warfarin, aspirin, and placebo, respectively. Aspirin and warfarin are both effective in reducing ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. Because warfarin-eligible patients composed a subset of all aspirin-eligible patients, the magnitude of reduction in events by warfarin versus aspirin cannot be compared. Too few events occurred in warfarin-eligible patients to directly assess the relative benefit of aspirin compared with warfarin, and the trial is continuing to address this issue. Patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation who can safely take either aspirin or warfarin should receive prophylactic antithrombotic therapy to reduce the risk of stroke.